A Coarse Guide to the Steam Locomotive for ‘N’ Gauge Modellers

[martyn]

Thanks again, John, for a well written piece on the LNER use of poppet valves. I've not much to add.

In 1947, light might have been shed on the change to piston valves again, as according to a paper written and presented by Mr. Robson, chief test inspector at Darlington works, said, basically, that extensive testing of the three types of D49 (piston valve, oscillating cam and rotary cam) showed that results from the two types of poppet valve locos were nearly identical in performance, but disappointing compared to the piston valve loco. The latter also turned in better economy over a range of speeds. The RCTS book speculates that, but for WW2, all the poppet valve engines would have been rebuilt with piston valves, as had the B12s, the J20, P2 2001, and the D49/3 poppet valve engines.

The P2 2001 had extensive trials on the LNER as well as in France. The UK trials were with continuous cams, enabling infinite adjustment of the cut-off, but by the time it went to France, stepped cams giving five fixed cut-offs were provided. Chapelon was consulted frequently during design and trials. The loco ran OK on the road in France, but suffered frequent hot axle boxes on the test plant. Most of the trials in both the UK and France seem to have been deciding on the best arrangement of the Kylchap exhaust system, though early trials in the UK were to try and find the best settings of the valve gear. Stepped cams had been fitted (and also to the poppet valve D49s) as the scroll type continuous type had been found to wear badly. The RCTS book says that 2001 was rebuilt to piston valves (and given A4 type streamlining) to conform with the other locos in the class.

Martyn

[Train Waiting]

A Coarse Guide to the Steam Locomotive for 'N' Gauge Modellers - Part 70


Hello Chums

Poppet Valve Gears - 2. The Early LMS Experience

Unlike on the LNER, the LMS didn't have much to do with poppet valves, although it returned to the idea at the end of its existence. Let's have quick look at its two earlier applications.

The 'Claughtons'

The first application was to 11 ex-LNWR 'Claughton' 4-6-0s between 1926 and 1928. We met Mr Beames when we discussed the fitting of Walschaerts valve gear to some ex-LNWR 'Prince of Wales' 4-6-0s.  Having been denied the office of Chief Mechanical Engineer of the LMS meant that Mr Beames found himself Mechanical Engineer of the Western Division. Quite a come down for someone who had been Chief Mechanical Engineer of the LMWR until its amalgamation with the LYR in 1922.

However, Mr Beames kept up to date with developments in the locomotive world and was impressed by the use of Caprotti valve gear in Italy. Unlike many applications of Lentz valve gear, the rotary Caprotti gear could be configured to give the driver a wide range of cut-off positions.

Mr Bowen Cooke's 'Claughton' class 4-6-0s of 1913 had the makings of being great engines but, unfortunately, they fell short. Capable of outstanding performances on occasion, relatively short travel valves, lubrication difficulties, erratic steaming and high coal consumption detracted from their usefulness in everyday service. Being the best express passenger locomotives the LNWR had, construction continued until the upheaval of the Amalgamation and, a year later, the Grouping.

The 'Claughtons' had Walschaerts valve gear and Mr Beames proposed experimentally converting one to Caprotti valve gear.  No. 5908, Alfred Fletcher, was the chosen engine and she entered service in this form in 1926. She was successful with a reduction in coal consumption of 20%.

Because of the timidity of the LNWR's Chief Civil Engineer, Ernest Trench, regarding the weight of the planned 'Claughton' class, Mr Bowen Cooke was forced to change from the original 5 foot 5 inch diameter boiler to one of 5 foot 2 inch.  Mr Bowen Cooke attempted to explain that the perfect balance of the four-cylinder design would eliminate 'hammer blow' and permit a higher weight on each axle, but Mr Trench would have nothing of it. Once again, the 'Civils' won and locomotive development was affected.

By the mid-1920s, the motive power situation on the former LNWR main line was in dire straights and it was decided to give some 'Claughtons' larger boilers, pressed to 200 psi rather than 175 psi, as an interim solution. These rebuilt engines appeared in 1928. Ten were equipped with Caprotti valve gear and demonstrated a coal saving of 27% over the originals.




[Doesn't she look SuperSpiffing?  Large-boilered Caprotti 'Claughton' No. 5927  Sir Francis Dent sparkles in LMS post-1928 crimson lake livery.]


But it was all to late.  The high coal consumption of the class as originally designed was due to steam leakage past the piston valves. The use of better valve rings and long lap/ long travel valves would prove to be equally effective.

Thw first fifty 'Royal Scot' 4-6-0s, built by the North British Locomotive Company, appeared in 1927 and transformed the motive power situation. An additional twenty were built by the LMS at Derby in 1929.

In 1930, 'Claughtons' Nos. 5902 and 5971 were rebuilt as what was to become the 'Patriot' or 'Baby Scot' class.  'Rebuilt' is a bit of a stretch as all that was renewed was the bogie, coupled wheel centres and a few minor parts.  These were excellent locomotives and the subsequent fifty examples didn't even pretend to be rebuilt 'Claughtons'. 

This influx of new engines was the death knell for the 'Claughtons' and only four remained in service at the end of 1937, although one survived to be taken into BR stock. The Caprotti-fitted locomotives had all been withdrawn by the end of 1936.

*

The Horwich 'Moguls'

The Hughes/Fowler 5F 2-6-0 of 1926 was a very good engine indeed with long lap/ long travel piston valves of 11 inch diameter, operated by Walschaerts valve gear. The Horwich design team had been much influenced by Pennsylvania Railroad practice regarding valves and valve gear.

A total of 245 of these useful engines were built, the last appearing on 31 December 1932.

In 1931, five of the class were given Lentz rotary cam valve gear. As far as I can establish, these engines were built in 1929 and, presumably, the conversions were done as they went through Works for a General Repair. New engines of the class were being built in 1931, but, for some reason, it was decided to convert existing locomotives rather than build the poppet valve ones from new.

Initially, the converted locomotives showed a 1% saving in coal consumption over piston-valve engines, but, over five years, the saving was nearer 5%, indicating poppet valves were less susceptible to steam leakage. Maintenance costs were shown to be slightly in favour of the poppet valve engines.

As to whose idea this conversion was, I have been unable to ascertain. Sir Henry Fowler had been discretely given what would nowadays be called 'a sideways move' at the end of 1930 and Ernest (later, Sir Ernest) Lemon was  appointed Chief Mechanical Engineer effective from January 1931.  This was known to be an interim appointment - Mr Lemon was on his way to greater things on the LMS.  Mr Lemon left office at the end of 1931 to allow Mr (later, Sir William) Stanier to assume to post of Chief Mechanical Engineer.

Even if not Mr Lemon's idea, I assume he would have had to agree to the proposal to convert the five locomotives. 

We are fortunate to have on record the experiences of the late Terry Essery of Saltley shed, Birmingham, regarding these locomotives:

'One drawback with the Lentz system was that it would only allow a limited number of cut-off positions, rather like some of the older locomotives' notched quadrents. However, in 1953 the original mechanism was replaced with a new camshaft system devised by the Lentz engineer, Reidinger. Like the Caprotti gear it was infinitely variable but by then insufficient time remained for it to be properly assessed for inclusion in current BR designs.

'It was therefore engines equipped with Reidinger gear which we worked during the 1957-8 period [...] and to be truthful there was little noticeable difference from standard Walschaerts locomotives as far as freight duties were concerned. Possibly they were a little stronger at shorter cut-offs above 40 mph but this would have shown up on passenger work so driving technique was virtually the same.'¹

The late AJ Powell, who was a Mechanical Inspector on the LMS and, later, BR can add some detail regarding the locomotives with their original Lentz gear:

'In their original form with Lentz RC [rotary cam] valve gear, they could be a real nuisance to drivers, because of the finite cutoff steps which were all that were available: no fine adjustment meant more regulator adjustment and problems in getting a right combination when working hard. But the fitting of the Reidinger infinitely variable gear in 1953 got over that difficulty.'²





[The Reidinger valve gear on 'Horwich Mogul' No. 42829 can be seen in this broadside view.]


Sir William Stanier had no enthusiasm for poppet valves. In fact, when we look at his locomotive designs, Turbomotive excepted, they are utterly conventional in concept, but especially well executed.

After the War and Sir William's retirement from the LMS, locomotive operating conditions were markedly different. Which led to the LMS thinking again about poppet valves as we shall discuss in the next part of this SuperShort mini-series.


¹ Terry Essery, Steam Locomotives Compared, Atlantic, Penryn, 1996, ISBN 0 906899 65 6, Page 104.

² AJ Powell, Living with London Midland Locomotives, Ian Allen, London, 1977, ISBN 0 7110 0728 4, Page 53.


'N' Gauge is Such Fun!

Many thanks for looking and all best wishes.

Cheerie-B

John

[martyn]

The fixed number of steps for cut-off was also a a problem sometimes on the LNER locos; in one case, the driver told the inspector that in one position, the loco couldn't take its load, and the next one 'would have killed the fireman'. As told in my previous post, some of the LNER locos had continuous scroll camshafts giving infinite adjustment of the cut-off, but this was found to wear badly as the end of the valve push rod was a point (I think), and so this type was replaced by the stepped camshaft. Some stepped camshafts had five positions; some, later, seven.

There is brief mention of Reidinger gear in the RCTS book dealing with the D49s, but no details.

Thanks again, John

Martyn

[Train Waiting]

A Coarse Guide to the Steam Locomotive for 'N' Gauge Modellers - Part 71


Hello Chums

Poppet Valve Gears - 3. The Later LMS Experience

'Stanier disliked these "fancy" valve gears, partly because he thought they introduced more complications than their potential advantage could warrant, and partly because they had been tried elsewhere in England* by Gresley and others and failed to prove themselves. Ivatt, on the other hand, considered the improved exhaust port openings an advantage well worth going for, and he also felt that their comparative lack of success in previous applications in England had been largely due to the application being approached with insufficient enthusiasm.'¹

This passage is from HAV Bulleid's Master Builders of Steam, published in 1963. Mr Bulleid was OVS Bulleid's son and HG Ivatt's nephew. The preface to the book  was written by Messrs Bulleid, Ivatt and Sir William Stanier.

These connections give me confidence that what Mr Bulleid writes in the passage I quoted is a true reflection of the views of Mr Ivatt and Sir William Stanier.

*

A quick recap...

The War changed everything.

Mr Stanier was seconded full time to the Ministry of Production as Scientific Adviser in October 1942 and resigned from the LMS in 1944.  His successor as Chief Mechanical & Electrical Engineer was Charles Fairburn. Mr Fairburn was a distinguished electrical engineer and was, unfortunately, not in good health. Mr Ivatt had been Principal Assistant to Mr Stanier since 1937 and retained that role under Mr Fairburn. He was, effectively, in charge of steam locomotive engineering on the LMS since the commencement of Mr Stanier secondment.

Mr Fairburn died late in 1945 and Mr Ivatt was appointed Chief Mechanical and Electrical Engineer of the LMS from 1 February 1946.

Mr Stanier's well-deserved Knighthood was announced in the 1943 New Year Honours List. 

*

Mr Ivatt realised the post-War priorities would be very different from those of the late 1930s.  Problems of reduced manpower and inferior coal were anticipated and it would be important to improve locomotive availability and utilisation. Maintenance would have to be simplified and Mr Ivatt set a target for the 100,000 mile locomotive - that is it would run 100,000 miles between Works visits. Before the War, half of that was a more realistic mileage.

Using the especially successful '5MT' 4-6-0 'Black Five' as a test bed, Mr Ivatt arranged for 30 to be built incorporating a series of developments. We discussed No. (4)4767 with Stephenson link motion in a previous part.

Twenty were built with Caprotti valve gear, driven from the leading coupled axle by bevel gears and a drive shaft. These emerged from Crewe Works in 1948 and were numbered 44738-44757. Caprotti valve gear allowed the mileage between valve examinations to be increased from the 30-36,000 miles for piston valve engines to 40-48,000 miles. This phased nicely with an interval of 20-24,000 miles for renewal of piston rings. In the difficult post-War conditions, this kind of improvement was especially desirable.




[The drive for the Caprotti valve gear.]




[One of the twenty Caprotti-fitted locomotives, with the interim number with an 'M' prefix. This was changed within a few months to 44748.]

The twenty Caprotti-fitted locomotives quickly gained a reputation for being fast and free-running engines but very weak at low speeds. Mr Ivatt knew that the Caprotti poppet valves caused a very sharp exhaust and believed that the drivers were reducing the cut-off too early:

'Ivatt [...] carried out the very simple modification of falsifying the scale [on the reverser] so that at the 30 mark the gear was actually set at 40 per cent cut-off.'²

This wheeze, coupled with some modifications to the cams and valve timing improved matters but these twenty Caprotti engines never fully shook off their reputation for being weak in the lower speed ranges.  Here's AJ Powell, Mechanical Inspector, on his first experience of a Caprotti 'Class Five':

'We had No 44749 on a train of 35 wagons, fully fitted, and on the rise to Tring on the slow road we received constant checks from the train in front. After each one, the driver really had to flog the engine away, and it was painful work getting up to about 30 mph. Then, just as if some governor cut out at that speed, the engine would really begin to get hold of the train, and full regulator and 25% cutoff would keep us rolling at 45-50mph up the 1 in 335.'³

And, later in the same journey:

'The downhill stretch to Blisworth gave us the initial momentum without too much difficulty, and thereafter she kept up a steady 50-60mph almost all the way to the turnoff at Ashby Junction, Nuneaton, on full regulator, 25% cutoff, and a blinding fire maintained by an utterly staccato exhaust. It was an exhilarating experience to hear the engine tearing along in the darkness this way.⁴

Meanwhile, Fireman Terry Essery at Saltney thought there was little difference between Caprotti or piston-valve engines at lower speeds. He emphasised his experience was on engines after the modifications had been made:

'Because of their valve events, Caprottis produced a sharper and louder exhaust bark especially at short cut-offs than a Standard Black 5, consequently drivers instinctively tended to notch them up much further than usual and this would pass unnoticed if the scale was not visible. Hence one possible reason for the alleged weakness on starting. Without doubt though, they did produce more power on cut-offs less than 25% at speeds over about 45mph.'⁵


The twenty Caprotti-fitted locomotives, Nos 44738 - 44757, achieved some of the highest average annual mileages for the class during the 1950s.

**

The final two of the experimental 'Black Fives' were delayed and did not enter service until April and May 1951. These had just about every modification that had been tried on the other experimental locomotives, including Caprotti valve gear but with a different arrangement, where the drive was taken from a drive box on the return crank of the driving wheels. Unlike on the earlier Caprotti engines, the drive shafts were outside. This pair of locomotives had high running plates, similar to those on Mr Ivatt's '4MT' 2-6-0 locomotives. These two locomotives had received further modifications to the valve events which improved their performance. Mr Powell described them as 'a very different kettle of fish from the originals'.

Mr Essery went further:

'They were so strong and lively that some felt they should be in a higher power class.' ⁶




[The valve gear from one of the two final Caprotti-fitted 'Black Fives'. Very different from the first 20. Also seen is the high running plate.]


Incidentally, the final two Caprotti-fitted locomotives, 44686 and 44687, were the last of the 842 Stanier Black Fives' to be built.

I had intended to cover the Caprotti-fitted BR Standard locomotives in this part, but the fascinating story of the Caprotti 'Black Fives' meant this part is already far too long.


* The use of 'England' as a synonym for 'Great Britain' was once commonplace and can still be seen to-day. I'm as sure as I can be that Mr Bulleid wasn't deliberately excluding the work on poppet valve locomotives carried out elsewhere in Great Britain. As an example, Beardmore of Glasgow held the UK licence for Caprotti valve gear for a time.

¹ HAV Bulleid, Master Builders of Steam, Ian Allan, London, 1963, Page 178.

² HAV Bulleid, Page 178.

³ AJ Powell. Living With London Midland Locomotives, Ian Allan, London, 1977, ISBN 0 7110 0728 4, Page 43.

⁴ Powell, Page 44.

⁵ Terry Essery, Steam Locomotives Compared, Atlantic, Penryn, 1996, ISBN 0 906899 65 6, Page 113.

⁶ Essery, Page 113.


'N' Gauge is Such Fun!

Many thanks for looking and all best wishes.

Toodle-pip

John

[Bealman]

Indeed fascinating.

[Train Waiting]

A Coarse Guide to the Steam Locomotive for 'N' Gauge Modellers - Part 72


Hello Chums

Poppet Valve Gears - 4. The BR Caprotti Locomotives

The BR Caprotti locomotives were the children of tragedy; a truly shocking tragedy. The Harrow and Wealdstone Disaster, of 8 October 1952, involving three trains, resulted in 112 deaths. Great Britain's second-worst railway disaster and the worst in peacetime. Let's join together in hoping these two sad distinctions are never, ever taken away from it.

*

Paling into insignificance compared to the dreadful human cost in dead and injured were the two locomotives destroyed in the disaster. One of these was 4-6-2 No. 46202, Princess Anne, rebuilt from the LMS Turbomotive, and entering service only a couple of months before the disaster.

*

Due to a perceived adequate provision of Regional types, the scheme for building the BR 'Standard' locomotives classes didn't include an express passenger locomotive of power class '8P', contenting itself with the mixed traffic 'Britannia' class 4-6-2 engines, rated at '7MT'.

The loss of No. 46202 prompted a rethink. The Railway Executive's Locomotive Headquarters people, under RA Riddles, initially schemed out a conventional 'Standard'-type design - a sort of super-'Britannia'. However, on the London Midland Region, Mr Ivatt the Younger, who had found Nationalisation not entirely to his liking, had retired and gone off for another career in diesel traction with a private locomotive building firm. After all, Mr Ivatt had been responsible for the country's first main-line diesel locomotives.

His replacement as Chief Mechanical & Electrical Engineer of the London Midland Region was JF Harrison. The Railway Executive had a policy of cross-posting senior officers from the former 'Big Four' companies and Mr Harrison was an LNER man. He was a huge admirer of the locomotives of Sir Nigel Gresley. After a bit of to-ing-and-fro-ing with Headquarters, Mr Harrison succeeded in making his influence felt. The new locomotive, No. 71000, Duke of Gloucester, which entered service in 1954, was a three-cylinder 4-6-2 ... and she was fitted with Caprotti valve gear.

The main reason for this was it permitted steam distribution to the inside cylinder without the need for inside valve gear. Exactly what Sir Nigel Gresley had achieved with his use of the Gresley/Holcroft conjugated valve gear thirty years earlier. The arrangement was clever - outside drive shafts were powered by return cranks on the driving wheels and these worked the valves on the outside cylinders. There was a cross-shaft from the left-hand cylinder's cam box which provided the drive for the inside cylinder's cam box through a bevel gearbox.





'It can be said right away that the engine portion of [Duke of Gloucester] proved to be superb, and showed a cylinder efficiency unmatched by any other simple expansion engine in the world, of which records are available.'¹

Although Duke of Gloucester's cylinder performance was exceptionally good, she couldn't reliably produce sufficient steam and ended up as the black sheep of Crewe North steam shed. It appears some keen firemen had more success making her steam, using a firing technique different from that used on the Stanier 'Pacifics'.

The British Transport Commission's 'Modernisation Plan' was published in 1955 and the change in emphasis appears to have prevented proper investigation into the causes of this one-off locomotive's disappointments. I wonder how she would have got on if she had been transferred to the East Coast - maybe 'Top Shed' or Haymarket and given her own crew.

The good news is that, since being rebuilt from scrapyard condition by indefatigable preservationists, and with certain modifications, No. 71000 has reached her true potential and is capable of amazing performances.

*

The Headquarters design team realised that No. 71000's Caprotti valve gear was excellent, and in a rearguard action for steam, arranged for 30 of the final batch of 47 'Standard Five' 4-6-0s, included in the 1956 building programme, to have Caprotti valve gear. These engines, numbered from 73125 to 73154, began to emerge from Derby Works in 1957. And that, apart from the building of the final authorised '9F' 2-10-0s, which lasted until 1960, was the end of steam locomotive construction for BR. 

Unfortunately, as interest in steam was in decline as a consequence of the Modernisation Plan, the necessary expenditure to conduct formal tests with a Caprotti-fitted Standard Five' was not authorised. What is known is that the valve gear was a two-cylinder version of that used on Duke of Gloucester and that the 'Standard Fives' were equipped with a good boiler.

Without the benefit of test results, we need to look elsewhere for the performance of the Caprotti-fitted 'Standard Fives'. Some were allocated to the Scottish Region where, in the final flowering of steam, they were used on the Glasgow (Buchannan Street) - Aberdeen 'Three Hour' trains. This required them to work turn-and-turn about with the 'A4' 'Pacifics' that ended their service on these trains. The January 1964 number of Railway Magazine contains details of a sparkling performance by No. 73135, including running the 32 1/2 miles from Perth to Forfar in 30 min 58 sec. The train was eight carriages for 225 tons tare.




[Here's one of No. 73135's sister engines - No 73150. Allocated to 65B St Rollox which, with 61B Ferryhill, provided the motive power for the Glasgow to Aberdeen trains. Note the shed's name on the buffer beam in LNER style. This was fairly common on the Scottish Region, even for former LMS sheds. Please forgive the unwelcome intrusion of a SuperSmelly diesel in the background - it looks like an EE 'Type 1' Bo-Bo to me.]


Here's an interesting quotation from Terry Essery, a fireman at Saltley:

'I much regret that I never had the opportunity of working on one of the thirty examples fitted with the latest type outside drive line Caprotti valve gear. Rumours filtering through the railway grapevine indicated that without any of the previous vices attributed to them, they were now the fastest and most economical 5s yet.'²

*

And that takes us to the end of this extraordinary brief mini-series' section on valve gears.


¹ ES Cox, British Railways Standard Steam Locomotives, Ian Allan, London, 1966, Page 128.

² Terry Essery, Steam Locomotives Compared, Atlantic, Penryn, 1996, ISBN 0 906899 65 6, Page 122.


I have to go into hospital later this week for the lovely people there to have a second attempt at a procedure. My concentration is, at present, becoming compromised, so I'll shunt the mini-series onto the back road of our steam shed until I'm ready to book on again.

Then, we'll think a little more about locomotives with more than two cylinders and also consider compounding. In the meantime ...


'N' Gauge is Such Fun!

Many thanks for looking and all best wishes.

Toodle-pip

John

[Ali Smith]

Thank you for another fascinating episode. I hope all goes well at the hospital.

All the best,

Ali

[Papyrus]

Seconded! I hope your procedure is successful this time and you are soon back home and hitting the keyboard again.

That's a fine photo of the Standard Class 5. A lot of people didn't like the look of the high running board but I think they are/were handsome engines.

All the best,

Chris

[martyn]

And thirded.

Good wishes for next week and hope all goes well for you.

Looking forward to your return and the next part of the thread.

I'll try and look up the RCTS book on BR Pacifics, but I think the problem with the Duke was in the air supply to the fire, but I need to check.

Martyn

[Train Waiting]

Many thanks, Martyn.

In his 1966 book, ES Cox called 71000 a 'near miss' and stated that we'd never know quite what was wrong with the locomotive's inability to produce sufficient steam, albeit whilst burning a lot of coal.

There was a story going round some time ago that, when restoring the engine, it was found that the primary air flow through the ashpan and grate was insufficient due to a manufacturing error.

The custodians of the locomotive, The BR Class 8 Steam Locomotive Trust, state this is not the case and the ashpan was fabricated to the original drawings.

They also state the British Caprotti company wanted a KylChap exhaust but BR refused, using instead a straightforward double chimney and blastpipe designed at Swindon. Swindon, and Sam Ell in particular, were the leading lights in locomotive draughting and did good work improving several classes' performance. 

BR appeared to have a lack of enthusiasm for the KylChap exhaust - probably, like the companies of old they didn't like paying royalties. The four KylChap-fitted 'A4s' were known to be excellent engines - just look at how long it took for Mr Townend to persuade those in authority to fit these to the rest of the class. And then to the 'A3s' which revitalised them.

The Trust states that 71000 was originally 'over draughted' (shades of Mr Ivatt's LMS '4MT' 2-6-0 with double chimneys - later removed).

In preservation, as far as I'm aware, the locomotive has always run with a KylChap exhaust and has been a remarkably strong performer.

The Trust has a web-site which is well worth a look for more details.

https://www.theduke.uk.com/

By the way, I intend to devote the last section of the Coarse Guide to draughting - it was probably the last area of uncertainty in British steam locomotive design and development. As an example, just look at the single and double chimney permutations amongst the BR 'Standard' classes.

Thanks again and all good wishes.

John

[port perran]

I hope all gos spiffingly well with your procedure during the week John.

I look forward to you returning to the forum suitably re-energised.

Best Regards

Martin

[Hailstone]

All the best for next week John, and for a fast recovery

Regards,

Alex

[Hailstone]

"There was a story going round some time ago that, when restoring the engine, it was found that the primary air flow through the ashpan and grate was insufficient due to a manufacturing error.

The custodians of the locomotive, The BR Class 8 Steam Locomotive Trust, state this is not the case and the ashpan was fabricated to the original drawings."

that's not what I was told by the people responible for its first rebuild almost 40 years ago when it was at Didcot

Regards,

Alex

[Bealman]

All the best for your op, John. I've just this minute returned from hospital myself, the results of my prostate scan were a bit dodgy and I have to have a biopsy next week. Old age really does suck.

But I of course logged straight onto your excellent thread, which has totally distracted me from the morning's hospital visit.

All the best.

[Firstone18]

Here's hoping your hospital stay resolves the problems for you.
Wishing you a speedy recovery.