Why Steam Locomotives are so Labour Intensive

[Locoman69]

Steam locomotives remain, even throughout the world, as a great fascination to many young and old alike, and one of the reasons why such a debating point as LNER exists today. Unfortunately steam locomotives could never be classed as an economical form of transport in today’s modern world, but in their heyday up until the 1960’s and until replaced by modern vehicular transport, they were the mainstay of every country in the world’s economy.

The problem with steam locomotives, was they were very labour intensive, requiring quite a few grades of men to operate and maintain them, plus because of the nature of how they were powered, their distance of operational duties were quite limited: mainly due to the amount of coal they carried to maintain steam pressure and the fact that because of the high forced draft requirement to create a very hot and intense fire, the fire eventually, in loco men’s terms, ‘became dirty’. After several hours working, the intense heat caused the solids and ash content of the coal to fuse together and form thick solids called ‘clinker’ to form on the firebars. This prevented oxygen reaching the fire from the firebars below and thereby reducing steam pressure generation.

Another result of burning coal was that the fire created a great deal of ash which fell into the ash pan below to such an effect that it could touch the firebars and again reduce the flow of oxygen. A further problem was that the blast on the fire when the engine was working heavy created quite a deal of sparks to be drawn through the boiler tubes and out of the chimney, a familiar sight which could be seen at night and quite often caused grass and cornfield fires during very dry weather in the summer. However most of this ash collected and settled in the smokebox to quite a depth, which had to be emptied after every run. A very dirty job, believe me.

Apart from long distance main line workings where engines could work up to around 300 miles, (non stop ‘Flying Scotsman’ 400 miles), most other local passenger workings and the bulk of freight workings were often less than 200 miles. Then the engine would have to return to shed, have the fire cleaned, a very labour intensive, dirty and hot frustrating job, especially with a long firebox locomotive whereby the fire had to be withdrawn from the firebox with a steel shovel around 8feet long, manhandled in the close confines of the cab and thrown down onto the ground. Considering that most freight engines had fireboxes measuring 28sq feet (Austerities - O2 and O4’s) and filled with fire up to two feet high, this was a long, dangerous, dirty and hazardous job, more so when a strong wind was blowing.

Following this you had to go underneath the engine and withdraw all the ash from the ashpan, imagine the conditions when the ash was blowing towards you and their was no other way, then finally climb up to the smokebox door, open it and clear all the black smokebox ash out.

Finally, depending on whether the engine was going to be operational later or the following day, the fire had to be made up, or thrown out completely, the engine coaled and the tank filled with water. This I’m afraid was the kind of duties that had to be completed after every working and very few rail enthusiasts ever contemplate.

However to be fair, these duties were very rarely performed by crews who had just completed a working, as they had normally finished their eight-hour shift by then. These duties were performed by shed staff locomen assigned specifically to, ‘put an engine away’ as it was called, or at the other end of the scale, prepare engine’s ready for going off shed at the appropriate time. All part of the long promotional ladder up to ‘main line working’.

It must be pointed out as no doubt many readers will be aware, the more modern locomotives were fitted with labour saving devices, such as ‘drop’ firebars on all Gresley designed express engines or ‘rocking firebars’ on all other modern Loco’s so that the fire could be dropped into the ash pan below. Also, some engines had self cleaning ashpans and smokeboxes as indicated with a small sign attached to the smokebox stating SC (self cleaning).

At New England where I was stationed we were fortunate to have properly built disposal pits where three labourers were employed solely for disposing engines. They were all employed on ‘peacework’ rate wages and paid as to the rate of how many engines they could dispose of within their eight-hour working day. However, very few loco depots had these types of facilities if at all any, that I knew of.

To continue, (I wonder just how many readers are really interested !!), but it is all a part of essential part of locomotive operating. Another very important factor in a locomotive being ready and prepared for a ‘working’ was when an engine was ‘dead’. i.e. no fire in and no steam pressure. Normally throughout the week on day to day running, after an engine had completed it’s normal diagrammed working and the engine had been ‘disposed of’ (above), the fire after cleaning would be built up at the rear of the firebox just to maintain a small fire and retain a very low steam pressure. Then around every two hours, a labourer called a ‘firelighter’ would go round every engine on the shed to keep a check on their fire and boiler pressures. Later on when the engine was required for duty, another engine crew would ‘prepare’ the engine ready for it’s normal working crew.

However, back to when an engine was allowed to go ‘dead’ and the fire removed. Normally, this occurred mostly at the weekend, or when an engine required a ‘boiler washout’, quite frequently. When an engine was required for duty again the fire had to be relit and it would take around eight hours for the fire to really take hold and to build up a slight head of steam pressure. Then once around a pressure of 20psi had built up it would be enough to turn on the ‘blower’. This is a jet ring situated around the blast pipe in the smokebox, which when turned on creates a vacuum and draws the fire throughout the length of the boiler via the smoke tubes and steam is then built very quickly. (This is also operated when the driver closer the regulator to draw the fire through the chimney, otherwise it would erupt into the cab with fatal results).

Until that moment the fire, when it is first let, quite naturally, endeavours to find the quickest way into atmosphere, which is out the firebox door and straight into the cab, despite the door being closed. The fire, obviously, would not attempt to pass through the boiler tubes and out of the chimney around 60 feet away. As one can imagine, the fire billowing into the cab for around eight hours caused the whole of the boiler front to become a solid mass of soot, but when finally steam had been created it could be then drawn, as described above, drawn through the boiler fire tubes, and out of the chimney. The whole cab and boiler front would remain quite a very dirty mess for the preparation crew to contend with and clean up when required to prepare the engine for it’s next working.

On a Sunday most loco shed’s would be quite dark, dirty and dismal locations when quite a number of engines had been fired up in this way ready for their Monday’s workings, but this was a normal situation.

For the miniature steam enthusiast however, this is a different matter, they can fit a small electric blower to their locomotive chimney and raise steam very quickly. For full sized locomotives, in their day, it was quite impossible and far too expensive. However, if it was necessary and an engine was required urgently, the shed foreman would direct a crew to couple up to the particular engine with another engine and pull it up and down the shed yard and whatever direction you were push/pulling, put it into a reverse gear. This caused the pistons to pump air into the boiler and build up enough pressure to turn on the ‘blower’.

Finally I have tried to set out the reasons why steam locomotives were so highly labour intensive and in reality not very economical from an operating sense, but they still remain a constant fascination to so many and having experienced all that I have related above, I’m so pleased I was part of it.

Brian Bell
Locoman69

[ROY@34F]

Another very interesting artical Brian.Yes ,I remember those days well at Grantham,cleaning fires on "tangos'",hard work indeed.we had a cleaner assigned with a list of engines due to leave the shed,to clean the "fronts" ie of course the boiler back plates with all the valves etc. on.I've done it myself of course.Re. firelighting a "dead" engine, at top shed KX,they used compressed air to keep smoke to minimum and raise steam a bit quicker.Holes were drilled in tubing which was formed in a circle to use as a jet ring.the tubing then bent to 90 degrees, poked down the chimney,being held in place by another bend hanging on the chimney lip.I was on loan there for 2 years from dec.'59 to dec.'60.Luckilly there was no cleaning fires there neither,there was a gang of chaps simillar to New England...great stuff..
Roy.

[Locoman69]

Hi Roy,

Pleased to meet an ex footplate colleague. No doubt you appreciate the fact that footplate work was not all that the romantic's would have us believe. I was curious as to where 34F is. According to my Ian Allan number book, yes I've still got one, there's no such depot. I resigned off the footplate in October 1960 to follow another career, but god did I miss it. It's great to be able to transfer my memories through this medium and the chance to meet so many others who have so much interest in steam railways.

Brian

[Bryan]

Just an illustration of the labour intensive work from the other railway found today on Youtube.,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAmZ_Z1B ... ture=email

[ROY@34F]

Hi Brian,34F was Grantham.Previous to about 1958 it was 35B,coming under New England (35A).they both came under KX about then ,becoming 34E and 34F. I too left in dec. '63,just after Grantham loco closed ,and boy did I miss it also.It gets in your blood I think..Mind you, I did ok the rest of my life,but I often wander..and can't forget the good old days on the footplate.
Regards,Roy.

[Locoman69]

Hi Ploughman, thanks for the information about the very interesting British Transport Film which practically vindicates all I wrote about ‘putting an engine away’ after a run. Admittedly it goes further regarding boiler washing etc but it shows just how labour intensive, dirty and dangerous the job was in those days. Imagine the written safety procedures required if it was done like that today !! No doubt each depot and region had different methods of doing the job but in the end it all had the same result.

I must confess that all my articles are based on experience and written from memory, but I did keep and maintain a complete diary record of every firing turn I completed during my ten year firing career, including every engine worked on, booking on times, train diagram workings and route.

My only regret is the fact for the last four months of those ten years I failed to keep any further records due obviously to the fact that I was about to leave and move on to a new career in the police. A pity really because in those four months I fired a considerable amount of main line expresses with Gresley Pacific’s and Peppercorn A1’s, all fine engines and on top of their job.

Unfortunately New England (Peterborough) where I worked, their main line express engines consisted of several of Thompson’s rebuilt Gresley 2-8-2 P2’s such as – Cock o the North, Thane of Fife, Wolf of Badenoch, Mons Meg and his A2’s Edward Thompson, Dante, Chamossaire, but from my personal point of view, the less said the better.

Finally I can certainly recommend that film and several others in that series.

Locoman69

[strang steel]

Thankyou Brian, for taking the time to write such a detailed account of the processes involved around steam locomotive preparation and disposal. As a spotter from the 50s and 60s, I read a lot of books/magazines and so had a fair idea of how things were, but there is nothing better than first hand accounts from those who worked on the railways.

It is not so much the filthy nature of coal fired locos that amazes me, but the sheer size of the firebox, fire and everything associated with. I know I am going "off region" now but I always look in awe at the dimensions of a Duchess pacific and wonder how any fireman could have coped with a grate of those dimensions while the 400 ton train was powering up towards Shap.

It is easy to see why the diesels made such an inmpact on BR, given that all they needed was a short time for pre-heating, then turn a key, switch it on and away you go.

Yes, I do think that we enthusiasts tend to look back through rose tinted spectacles but in some ways I consider a job that involves 8 or more hours of hard physical work at least makes a person able to appreciate their time off so much more.

John

[StevieG]

I couldn't agree more.
Thanks indeed to Locoman69, again, ... and to Bryan for the Youtube link. Call me thick if you like, but it never before occurred to me that staff had to go into fireboxes.

[kudu]

I must add my appreciation to Locoman69 for his account, and hope he will post some more. Thanks to Bryan as well for the link. I can remember those fast freights from Camden running through Willesden Junct, usually behind a Willesden Jubilee. That was Willesden shed, btw.

I have a few depot and workshop scenes among my digital pictures, but they only hint at the dirty work Locoman describes. As they date from 2003, they are quite a long way from New England too! I could post a few but I'm not sure where they would belong, if anywhere - LNER photographs they are not.

Kudu