J21 65033

[john coffin]

things is the tender is not 1002!!!!!!!!

our research suggests it is 1005.
the main visible difference with the later stirling tenders in photo's is two coal rails or three. the tender on the back of that J3 seems to be a 3500 gall version, unless the details you have tell you different. the 3500 had 3 coal rails.

paul

[manna]

G'Day Gents

G'Day John, Can you give us any proof that it came from 1005 !! as 1004 towed a two rail tender, 1007 and 1008 both towed a three rail tender. Even No69 of 1877 towed a three rail tender. see below.

manna

[Blink Bonny]

Ay up!

Do my eyes decieve me or does 1007 have an extended cab roof? Only by a couple of inches but, hey, as one of our supermarket chains says, "Every little helps!"

[john coffin]

thought this might come up, so i checked all my sources again,
stirling singles, leech and boddy,yeadon,brown stirling to gresley,
bird, locos of the gnr.plus many others.

nos 1001/2 were originally built out of revenue account, so were numbered 264/5 but at the same time, two stirling rebuilds of
sturrock 2-4-0's were still in traffic with those numbers, had the gnr board not allowed stirling to build new passenger engines
to the capital account i would guess the 2-4-0's would have been moved to the duplicate account. no where are 1001/2 detailed
as having 3850 tenders.
of more relevance however, is the combined evidence states that the only 8 footers originally built with 3850 tenders were the group
1003/1008. and the last 3850 tender in revenue use was as stated on the J3 in 1954. although it was condemned, there is no evidence that
it was broken up. when i received the first pictures of the stirling tender in the yard at york about 5 years ago, i was told that it was number 1005, and since i trust the source, that is where i take my data from.

the tenders were originally built with two rails, but 1007 was rebuilt by Ivatt in 1907, and may well have had a 3rd rail added.
1005 was withdrawn in 1918, about the time gresley was rebuilding J4/s as J3, so why waste a good tender??? especially when you
are trying to save money 1006 was the last 4-2-2 withdrawn in 1916, and yes they have different cabs from the earlier one, with a slightly longer overhang,and a curved cut out on the sidesheets.

as usual with not properly written down history things become complex, but i tend to trust yeadon and boddy and leech for their studies.

paul

[manna]

G'Day Gents

Having re-read the article, I believe there is now TWO, Stirling tenders still in existence I have been talking about the tender discovered in Connington tip in 1967 and then moved to Brighton and identified as 1002, it then goes on to say that a Stirling tender was discovered in the engineers woodyard at Doncaster in the late 70's, could this be 1005 !!!!

manna

[john coffin]

this all goes to show how difficult it is to be completely right about everything on the railways "wet wednesday in wigan " is my phrase, in that what ever you say, some one will find something different another day

having checked again the various sources i look for.
1/ the 3850 gall tenders were built from 1894-1896, and there were a total of 16 of them eventually.
2/ i believe that even at the end of his reign stirling was still building express locos and tenders with matching numbers.
3/ hence 1003 was originally both loco and tender.
4/ actually the re numbering of the two earlier. 1893 singles to 1001/2 was the first time that gnr locos were numbered beyond 1000.
and i am not sure at what number they started the batch of tenders, but all sources state that 1001/2 singles did not originall get fitted with the 3850 tender, but also bird and others state clearly that the tender build started in 1894, and the drawing is dated late 1893.
5/ looking more deeply into the use of tenders as service vehicles, it seems that late into the 1930's a number of early tenders, for instance an ex ger single tender were still running around, sadly no one thought to save them, which moves us to this tender.
6/ yeadon, locos of the gnr and leech and body state that 1005 was the last 3850 running, in 1954, by which time preservation was part of the br remit, wheres before the war it was much more hit and miss, witness what happened to the nbr 4-4-2 so i cannot believe that a tender taken out of service in 1930ish would still be around in suitable condition to take into the preservation stock in 1966, whereas one only 10years out of traffic might well be more well known and "visible"

anyway railway data always proves you wrong, so i am prepared to be incorrect, but also happy to think there might actually be two stirling tenders around
paul

[manna]

G'Day Gents

Hi Paul, I will admit I was starting to doubt myself, until I reread the article, it suddenly hit me like a bolt from the blue I'm going to PM you with the relevant page, Hey, wouldn't it be good to have two Stirling tenders, but what do we do with them now !! and where is the second one ??

manna

[john coffin]

manna did indeed send me the cutting, and i see that once again malcolm crawley and i have disagreements about things we have discovered on my journey through gnr tenders i know that malcolm did confirm data with mr boddy who he suggested was
no longer with us, only to discover he still, fortunately is however, when i first heard about its most recent discovery, about 6 years
ago, i was told it was 1005, so until and unless we find the doncaster building plate i will reserve judgement.

as i have said before though, the books i referred to do not suggest that the specific size of tenders were built before 1894, and 1001/2 were renumbered, is why i have my doubts, it is generally accepted that loco 1005 was the earliest of the late models which was withdrawn, but certainly after No1 was in storage in Kings Cross.

anyway the good news is that a "proper stirling tender" which it might have run with, is going eventually to be shown behind No1, so praise to york for listening.

as for the other tender, it is such a complex item. evidence suggests that at some time in its life it had outside springs above the footplate,
but was converted under stirling's regime to under floor, inside springs. Malcolm is sure it was a Sturrock design tender, but actually i wonder still whether the original underframe was a Hawthorn design? remembering that Stirling had worked at some time at Hawthorn, it might be possible to conclude he was happy to extend the life of one.


paul

[Rlangham]

Regarding 65033, I visited Shildon today and it was located outside, where, judging by photographs on flickr, it has been for at least a couple of weeks or so. Unfortunately despite the cosmetic restoration it's in very poor state with the paint job lifting already, i'll put images up tonight or tomorrow

[mick b]

I saw it on the North Norfolk railway a couple of years ago . It was at that time a total "cosmetic" wreck, no boiler fitted and the frames were just rust .

[Rlangham]

65033 at Shildon today - nice to see the J21 in one piece after so long, but hopefully seeing it in this condition will spur on efforts to get it completely restored to either operational or static

[52D]

The shed code should have forty added to the existing

[mr B]

well at least they are keeping the loco dry

[Rlangham]

Picked up this nice postcard of 876 in happier times - in NER livery and in steam at the Beamish Railway Station - I can send a high resolution copy to anyone interested

[paullad1984]

Seeing her running in any condition would be nice, but if she could be restored to NER livery again id be a happy man!
Does anyone know if she was dual westinghouse air and vac during her LNER days, i know some were?