Building the MOK "King Arthur"
- Thread starter oldravendale
- Start date
JimG
Western Thunderer
Much the same happened in Scotland, although by Drummond's successors. Smellie, Lambie and MacIntosh had continued on Drummond's designs for the Caledonian with some developments - like larger boilers - culminating in MacIntosh's Dunalistair classes I - IV which were up there with the best 4-4-0s in the UK. But when Macintosh turned his hand to the larger 4-6-0 classes, like "Cardean", then the results were not quite as good. They weren't a disaster but certainly weren't the expected improvement over their 4-4-0 predecessors. Arguably the best 4-6-0 class the Caledonian ever had was the "River" class, designed by F.G. Smith for the Highland but they were rejected by that line's Civil Engineer for being overweight, and were purchased by the Caledonian. They were, for the time, a modern outside cylinder 4-6-0 design which could out-perform the Caledonian 4-6-0s but spent most of their time on freight workings, presumably to avoid embarrassment. 
Jim.
Jim.
Martin Shaw
Western Thunderer
Picking up on Jim's post I can thoroughly recommend Donald Peddie's book on the Pickersgill 956 class, a small class of 4 locos, and a pretty feeble attempt to stretch a 4-4-0 to a 4-6-0. An in house version of conjugated valve gear was tried, seemingly without great success, but the fundamental problem appears to have been boiler draughting. Perhaps prowess and desire for innovation got in the way and the lack of exchange of ideas inhibited understanding of other approaches, Holcroft had solved the conjugation problem, and Churchward similarly draughting. There is no doubt in my mind that the 1st World War had a major impact on Scottish railways locomotive engineering and the subsequent grouping effectively ended progression north of the border. Having said that 30 Scotch Arthurs were built in Glasgow and they seem to have been alright.
Regards
Martin
Regards
Martin
Steph Dale
Western Thunderer
But of course, they did have the benefits of Clayton, Holcroft, et al to deal with the weak drafting of the original Urie design. It might also be worth pointing out that North British cut corners on the Arthurs they built and all needed an Eastleigh overhaul to get them into the shape they should have been in. Problems included frame, axleboxes and guides, boilers...
All in all, they weren't the greatest advertisement for Scottish engineering.
Steph
Martin Shaw
Western Thunderer
I take great exception to this slur on the fine working men of Springburn.
There is no doubt that there were problems with them, Stephen Townroe comments that there were several instances of hot boxes when they were towed from Glasgow to Eastleigh because "the contractors had made the axleboxes a too neat fit without sufficient working clearance". I find this a surprising statement, locomotive building had been going on in Springburn for something like 65 years and I find it difficult to accept that they built 30 locomotives with undersize axlebox clearance. Additional the SR would have had a new works inspector in the factory to oversee things. Now Townroe worked for the railway and I idly wonder whther this is a typical throwaway statement to hide the fact that they were inadequately lubricated for the journey.
I have looked in Bradley and whilst the report of 1926 is damning and it does contradict Townroe's assessment of the axleboxes, the building practices at the NBL wre well established and I can't find to hand any reference that there methods were unsatisfactory. It does appear that the SR got what they paid for rather than what they wished.
Regards
Martin
oldravendale
Western Thunderer
Well, it's dead but won't lie down. This is really, truly (probably) the final posting about the King Arthur until it's painted.......
I've changed the firebox door. Here's the original next to the Finney7 one. Handle is yet to shorten. The shelf was over long so that's been trimmed back. Otherwise it sits flatter to the backhead.
And here it is in situ.
'nuff said.
Brian
I've changed the firebox door. Here's the original next to the Finney7 one. Handle is yet to shorten. The shelf was over long so that's been trimmed back. Otherwise it sits flatter to the backhead.
And here it is in situ.
'nuff said.
Brian
Ian@StEnochs
Western Thunderer
The best of the Scottish 4-6-0s were the Manson superheated 128 class. They were also rather good looking engines but as there were only two in the class and not Caledonian they didn't stand a chance in the LMS who perpetuated the dreadful 'Greybacks'
Pencarrow
Western Thunderer
Hi Brian, great job on the King Arthur. Looking forward to seeing it painted.
With regards to the "pheasant catchers" I'm in the camp that likes them. IMO they make locos such as the SR moguls and 4-6-0s look a bit more purposeful.
You can go too far though - Bude etc were excessive!
With regards to the "pheasant catchers" I'm in the camp that likes them. IMO they make locos such as the SR moguls and 4-6-0s look a bit more purposeful.
You can go too far though - Bude etc were excessive!
oldravendale
Western Thunderer
Thanks Mick. With all the work already completed on the back head the firebox hole won't be cut out - apart from which all that work will be pretty well impossible to see anyway! I'll just paint it a burnt colour.
The contributions about the locos of other railways which this thread has stimulated is really interesting, Ian. I know little or nothing outside the LSWR/SR and LMS (and little enough about those, to be honest) so it all adds to background info.
Hi Chris. I like the deflectors as well, personally. The exception is the Brighton Ks which are a really attractive loco without. However, having seen Roger's Us without deflectors they have a certain charm as well and I guess the same will apply to the Ns.
Brian
The contributions about the locos of other railways which this thread has stimulated is really interesting, Ian. I know little or nothing outside the LSWR/SR and LMS (and little enough about those, to be honest) so it all adds to background info.
Hi Chris. I like the deflectors as well, personally. The exception is the Brighton Ks which are a really attractive loco without. However, having seen Roger's Us without deflectors they have a certain charm as well and I guess the same will apply to the Ns.
Brian
Tim Watson
Western Thunderer
Has Sir Sagramore been painted yet, Brian? It’s a lovely model.
My nameplates arrived recently:
Tim
My nameplates arrived recently:
Tim
oldravendale
Western Thunderer
Not yet, Tim. I was having some trouble in getting it to run properly. Kindly Mickoo offered to sort it out and found a number of cumulative issues which he's rectified for me. I've actually booked it in to Paul Moore to have the paint job done and will hand it over at Doncaster. It will appear on these pages - eventually - when it's done which will close this thread off.
Those nameplates are things of beauty. Well justified on that lovely loco of yours.
Brian
Those nameplates are things of beauty. Well justified on that lovely loco of yours.
Brian
Tim Watson
Western Thunderer
From Diane Carney. They are, of course, quite big.
Tim
Tim