The locomotive exhibits of 1851—The “Hawthorn”—Wilson’s
two-boiler engine, the “Duplex”—Fairbairn’s tank engine—The
S.E.R. “Folkestone” on Crampton’s system—Sharp’s
“single” engines for the S.E.R.—J. V. Gooch’s designs
for the Eastern Counties Railway—The “Ely,” Taff Vale
Railway—Beattie’s “Hercules”—A much-vaunted locomotive,
McConnell’s “300” L. & N.W.R—London and Birmingham
in two hours—The chief features of “300”—Competitive
trials with other engines—Coal v. coke—An earlier
“recessed” boiler—Dodd’s “Ysabel”—The first compound
locomotive—Another Beattie design—Pasey’s compressed air
railway engine—Its trial trips on the Eastern Counties
Railway—The original (Great Northern engines Sturrock’s
masterpiece, “No. 215,” G.N.R.)—Pearson’s famous 9ft.
“single” double-bogies, Bristol and Exeter Railway—Rebuilt
with 8ft. drivers, and a tender added by the G.W.R.—More
old Furness Railway engines—Neilson’s outside cylinder
locomotives—A powerful goods engine on the Maryport
and Carlisle Railway—Gooch’s 7ft. coupled broad-gauge
locomotives—His first narrow-gauge engines.
The premier International Exhibition, which, as all the world well
knows, was held in Hyde Park, London, 1851, brought together quite a
respectable collection of railway appliances. The British exhibitors
showed the following locomotives:—
London and North Western Railway’s “Cornwall” and “Liverpool.”
Great Western Railway’s “Lord of the Isles.”
Hawthorne’s express, “Hawthorn.”
Adams’ combined engine and carriage, “Ariel’s Girdle,”
built by Wilson and Co., Leeds.
England’s light locomotive, built by Fairbairn.
Fairbairn’s tank engine.
South Eastern Railway’s “Folkestone.”
E. B. Wilson and Co.’s double boiler tank engine.
Several of these have been described in an earlier chapter, whilst
details of other types (such as the “Lord of the Isles” type) have
also been given, so that it is not necessary to describe such designs
again. We have, however, to give particulars of Hawthorne’s express,
Fairbairn’s tank, the “Folkestone,” and Wilson’s “double boiler” tank
engine. The dimensions of the first are: cylinders, 16in. diameter,
22in. stroke; driving wheels, 6ft. 6in.; leading and trailing wheels,
3ft. 9in. diameter; heating surface of fire-box, including water
bridge, 110 sq. ft.; tubes, 865.4 sq. ft. The tubes were of brass, of
2in. external diameter, and 158 in number.
The “Hawthorn” had inside cylinders and double sandwich frames,
a raised fire-box, with an enclosed safety valve, no dome, but a
perforated steam-pipe for the collection of the steam was provided.
The engine was designed for running at 80 miles an hour; the special
features of the engine being double-compensating beams for distributing
the weight uniformly on all the wheels, equilibrium slide-valves, and
an improved expansion link suspended from the slide-valve rods. Instead
of fitting a spring to each wheel, two only were placed on each side
of the engine between the wheels. These springs were inverted, and
sustained by central straps attached to the framing. Their ends were
connected by short links to the wrought-iron double-compensating beams
placed longitudinally on each side of the engine, inside and beneath
the framing.
The two inner contiguous ends of these beams were linked by a
transverse pin to an eye at the bottom of the axle-box of the driving
axle, whilst the opposite ends of the beams were respectively linked
in a similar manner to eyes on the top of the leading and trailing
axle-boxes. The action of these beams was obvious. By them a direct
and simultaneous connection was given to all the axle bearings, and
consequently a uniform pressure was always maintained on all the
wheels, irrespective of irregularities on the permanent-way. The slide
valves were placed on vertical faces in a single steam chest, located
between the two cylinders. One slide-valve had a plate cast on its
back, and the other had an open box cast on its back to receive a
piston, which had its upper end parallel with the valve face. This
piston was fitted steam-tight in the box, and its planed top bore
against the face of the plate in working. By this arrangement the
slides were relieved from half of the steam pressure; and to assist a
free exhaust, a port was made in the back plate of one of the slides,
so providing an additional exit for the spent steam by means of the
piston and the exhaust ports of the opposite valve.
The expansion link was placed in such a position as to allow the
bottom of the boiler to be quite near the axle. The link, instead of
being fixed to the ends of the eccentric-rods, so as to rise and fall
with them when the reversing lever was moved, was suspended from its
centre, by an eye, from the end of the slide-valve spindle. This
removed the weight of the link, etc., from off the reversing gear.
The eccentric-rods were jointed to the opposite ends of the link
slide-block, to secure steadiness and durability of the parts. It
was claimed that this method of a fixed link-centre as fitted to the
“Hawthorn” ensured a more correct action of the valves.
Wilson and Co., of the Railway Foundry, Leeds, exhibited a curious tank
engine at the Exhibition of 1851, called the “Duplex,” in consequence
of it being provided with two boilers. The idea of the designer was to
obtain sufficient steam from an engine of light weight to haul a heavy
train. The original drawings of this engine are still in the possession
of Mr. David Joy, who designed it; and at first it was proposed to
build the “Duplex” with three cylinders and six-coupled wheels, but
afterwards fresh drawings were prepared, and it was from these latter
ones that the engine was built. The two boilers were placed side by
side, and these each measured 10ft. 6in. long by 1ft. 9in. diameter,
and together contained 136 tubes of 1¾in. diameter, the heating surface
of which was 694 sq. ft., that of the fire-box being 61 sq. ft., making
a total of 755 sq. ft. The cylinders were outside, their diameter
being 12½in., and the stroke 18in. The leading wheels were 3ft. 6in.
diameter; the driving and trailing (coupled) 5ft. diameter. Some other
dimensions were:—Total length, 24ft. 3in.; breadth, 5ft. 3in.; height
from rail to top of chimney, 13ft. 6in.; weight, empty, only 16 tons,
with fuel and water 19 tons 17 cwt. The capacity of tank was 520
gallons, sufficient for a journey of 25 miles; coke bunker, 42 cubic
feet, equal to 26 bushels, or 15 cwt. The “Duplex” was sold to a Dutch
railway after the Exhibition, and its further career is, therefore,
unknown to those interested in it.
Fairbairn’s tank locomotive was of the “well” type, supported on six
wheels, the driving pair being 5ft. diameter, and the L. and T. each
3ft. 6in. diameter. The cylinders were inside, measuring 10in. by 15in.
stroke. The boiler was 8ft. long by 3ft. diameter, and contained 88
brass tubes of 2in. diameter. The heating surface amounted to 480 sq.
ft. The internal fire-box was of copper, and measured 2ft. 5in. long,
3ft. wide, and 3ft. 5in. deep. The tank behind and under the foot-plate
held 400 gallons of water. The coke consumption of this little engine
was only 10lb. per mile with trains of six carriages, the weight in
working order only 13 tons; and it may interest our readers to know
that this diminutive locomotive was described as “a fair specimen of
the _heavier_ class of tank engine.
[Illustration: FIG. 61.-THE “FOLKESTONE,” A LOCOMOTIVE ON CRAMPTON’S
SYSTEM. BUILT FOR THE S.E.R., 1851]
The engine calling for the greatest attention at the Exhibition of
1851 was the “Folkestone” (Fig. 61), exhibited by the South Eastern
Railway. This was an engine built by R. Stephenson and Co., under one
of Crampton’s patents, but the principal feature in its design was
an intermediate driving axle, connected by means of outside cranks,
and coupling-rods to the driving wheels, which were (under Crampton’s
patent) behind the fire-box, the axle extending across the foot-plate.
It will be well, perhaps, if we at this point reiterate the fact
that the method of working locomotives by means of an intermediate
crank-shaft was not introduced by Crampton, it having been used some
years previously by W. B. Adams, not to mention some of the early
Stockton and Darlington Railway engines, where the same arrangement was
employed, but with vertical cylinders. Readers will, therefore, see
it is incorrect to describe locomotives with this system of machinery
as “Crampton’s patent,” although it is quite possible for a “Crampton
patent” locomotive to be provided with an intermediate driving shaft,
as was the case with the “Folkestone.”
Eight engines of this type were built by Stephenson and Co. for the
South Eastern Railway, and were numbered 136 to 143, the first of which
was named “Folkestone.” These engines were supported by six wheels, a
group of four being arranged close together at the smoke-box end. Their
diameter was 3ft. 6in. The driving wheels were 6ft. in diameter, the
wheel base 16ft. These engines weighed 26¼ tons each, of which only
10 tons were on the driving wheels, the remainder of the weight being
supported by the four leading wheels. The cylinders were inside, 15in.
diameter, and the stroke 22in. The fire-box top was flush with the
boiler barrel, the straight lines of which were unrelieved by a dome,
but an encased safety valve was fixed near the back of the fire-box
top. The boiler contained 184 tubes, of 2in. diameter and 11ft. in
length.
The “Folkestone” ran its trial trip on Monday, March 31st, 1851,
when Mr. McGregor, the chairman of the South Eastern Railway, Mr.
R. Stephenson, the builder of the engine, Mr. Barlow, the South
Eastern engineer, and Mr. Cudworth, the South Eastern locomotive
superintendent, were present. From London Bridge to Redhill no great
speed could be attained, as a Brighton train was in front; but beyond
the latter station, and with a train of nine carriages, the 19½
miles to Tonbridge were covered in 19½ minutes, a maximum speed of
75 miles an hour being attained. After a short stop, the journey to
Ashford was resumed, and that town was reached in 20½ minutes after
leaving Tonbridge. The times and distances were as follow:—Redhill to
Tonbridge, 19 miles 47 chains, start to stop in 19½ minutes; Tonbridge
to Ashford, 26 miles 45 chains, start to stop in 20½ minutes, or at the
rate of 78 miles an hour; the whole 46 miles 12 chains being covered
in 40 minutes, running time, or, including the stop at Tonbridge, in
43 minutes. It must be remembered that the line between Redhill and
Ashford is, perhaps, the most level and straight in England for so long
a distance.
These eight engines did not prove very successful in general working,
and they were afterwards rebuilt as four-coupled engines, an ordinary
cranked axle with wheels being provided in place of the intermediate
driving shaft.
It will not be out of place if we here mention eight “single” engines
built by Sharp Bros. in 1851 for the South Eastern Railway, and
numbered 144 to 151. The general dimensions were similar to the
Cramptons, except that the wheel base was only 15ft., and that the
heating surface was 1,150 sq. ft. The admission of the steam to the
cylinders was controlled by a hand lever, with catch and notches,
similar to and placed by the side of the ordinary reversing lever. Six
eccentrics were on the driving axle, two of them working the pumps.
The framing and springs of these engines were afterwards perpetuated
by Cudworth in his later and better known types of South Eastern
locomotives.
[Illustration: FIG. 62.—ONE OF J. V. GOOCH’S “SINGLE” TANK ENGINES,
EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY]
The locomotives of the despised “Eastern Counties,” that were designed
about 1850 by Mr. J. V. Gooch, will now be concisely described. They
were of three kinds—viz., “single” tanks, “single” express, and
four-wheels-coupled tender engines. Of the tanks, three sizes were
constructed, chiefly at the “Hudson Town” (or Stratford Works). The
largest of these were provided with outside cylinders, 14in. diameter
and 22in. stroke, the boiler being 10ft. 6in. long, and containing
164 tubes of 1³/₁₆th in. diameter. The leading and trailing wheels
had outside bearings, the driving wheels being provided with inside
bearings only. A steam dome was placed over the raised fire-box, and a
screw-lever safety valve on the boiler barrel. The water was stored in
two tanks, fixed between the frames, one below the boiler and the other
beneath the foot-plate. These tank engines were known as the “250”
class, and some of our readers may recollect that when Peto, Brassey
and Betts leased the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway, engines
of this design were used to work the traffic on that railway. We
understand it is now 20 years since the last of them (No. 08) reached
the final bourne of worn-out locomotives—the “scrap heap.”
The dimensions of the smallest class of these tanks (Fig. 62) were:
Cylinders, 12in. diameter, 22in. stroke; boiler, 10ft. long and 3ft.
2in. diameter, 127 tubes of 1⅞th in. diameter; the total heating
surface was 709 sq. ft.; grate area, 9.7 sq. ft. The driving wheels
were 6ft. 6in. diameter, and the L. and T. 3ft. 8in. The total weight
of these engines was 23 tons 19 cwt., of which 9 tons 14 cwt. was on
the driving axle. The wheel base was: L. to D., 6ft. 3in.; D. to T.,
5ft. 9in.
J. V. Gooch’s four-coupled, or “Butterflies,” had leading wheels 3ft.
8in. diameter, and driving and trailing (coupled) 5ft. 6in. Wheel base,
L. to D., 6ft. 3in.; D. to T., 7ft. 9in. The cylinders were 15in.
diameter, the stroke being 24in. The boilers of this class, and also of
the singles, next to be described, were of the same dimensions as those
of the “250” class of tanks.
The “single” expresses were provided with 6ft. 6in. driving wheels, and
cylinders 15in. diameter and a 22in. stroke; in this class also the
leading and trailing wheels were 3ft. 8in. diameter. The wheel base
was 14ft., the driving wheels being 6ft. 9in. from the leading and
7ft. 3in. from the trailing wheels. Ten engines of this design were
constructed, some at Stratford, and others at the then recently opened
Canada Works of Brassey and Co. at Birkenhead. Their official numbers
were from 274 to 283.
The “Ely” (Fig. 63) represents the type of 6-wheel passenger engine
in use on the Taff Vale Railway at this period. She was built in 1851
by Messrs. Kitson and Company, from Taff Vale designs. She had 13in.
cylinders, with 20in. stroke, and four-wheels-coupled, of 5ft. 3in.
diameter. She carried a pressure of 100lbs., she had a four-wheel
tender, carrying 900 gallons of water, and as the gross weight of the
tender was about 11 tons in working order, the gross weight of the
engine and tender would be 33 tons. The “Ely” could not take a train of
three carriages, weighing only 21 tons, up the Abercynon bank of 1 in
40 without the assistance of a “bank” engine.
In 1851 Mr. Beattie, the locomotive superintendent at Nine Elms, built
for the London and South Western Railway the four-wheels-coupled
engine, “Hercules,” No. 48. The frames of this engine were of the
“lattice” type, examples of which can be still seen on some of the
older Great Northern Railway tanks.
The diameter of wheels was: L., 3ft. 6in.; D. and T., 5ft. 6in.;
tender, 3ft. 6in.; wheel base, L. to D., 7ft. 1in.; D. to T., 6ft.
6in.; T. to leading tender, 7ft. 3½in.; the tender wheel base being
10ft. 3in. equally divided.
[Illustration: FIG. 63.—“ELY,” A TAFF VALE RAILWAY ENGINE, BUILT IN
1851]
The weight was distributed as follows:—Engine, L. axle, 8 tons 17 cwt.;
D., 9 tons 17 cwt.; T., 9 tons 16 cwt.; tender, L., 4 tons 19 cwt.;
M., 6 tons 19 cwt.; T., 7 tons 10 cwt. The cylinders were 15in. by
22in.; tractive force on rail, 7,500lb.; 1,800 gallons of water could
be carried in the tender tank. The “Hercules” had a flush top boiler,
and a raised fire-box surmounted by a large inverted, urn-shaped dome.
This design of locomotive was a favourite one on the London and South
Western Railway for many years, but the last engine of the kind has now
been scrapped.
Having favoured the London and South Western Railway, to equalise
matters, we cannot do better than give a description of a locomotive
belonging to its cousin-german, the London and North Western Railway.
The latter was indeed the more famous, being no other than McConnell’s
notorious “No. 300,” (Fig. 64) which, being introduced with a vast
amount of publicity, became a nine days’ wonder, then sank into
quiescent mediocrity, and after a brief locomotive career, was seen no
more—a rather different fate, be it observed, to that of the London and
South Western Railway’s “Hercules.”
It has been stated that only one drawing of this engine exists. This
is incorrect; the writer possesses a complete set of drawings relating
to “No. 300,” together with the whole of the specifications from which
the engine was constructed. To reproduce this specification in detail
would give too technical a character to this narrative, and would try
the patience of even the most ardent locomotive enthusiast.
The directors of the London and North Western Railway in 1851
expressed their determination to run their express trains from London
to Birmingham in two hours, and gave instructions to McConnell, the
locomotive superintendent at Wolverton, to design the necessary
locomotives. The salient features of the design were: Inside cylinders,
18in. by 14in.; six wheels, with inside and outside frames; driving
wheels, 7ft. 6in. diameter; leading, 4ft. 6in.; and trailing, 4ft.
diameter.
The boiler was 11ft. 9in. long and 4ft. 3¼in. external diameter. The
tubes were of brass, 303 in number, only 7ft. in length, and 1¾in.
outside diameter. The crank axle bearings were—outside, 7in. deep and
10in. in length, the inside ones being 7in. and 4¼in. respectively. The
leading and training axles were hollow, the metal being 1½in. thick,
and the hollow centre 4½in. diameter, thus making the total diameter of
the straight axles 7½in. The slide-valves had an outside lap of 1¼in.
The principal innovations were: Coleman’s patent india-rubber springs,
fitted below the driving axle and above the leading and trailing
axles, and also to the buffers. McDonnell’s patent dished wrought-iron
pistons, forged in one piece with the piston-rod, and encased with
continuous undulating flat metal packing. The steam-pipe was of flat
section, and passed through a superheating chest in the smoke-box; the
steam was thus dried during its journey from the dome to the cylinders.
The great feature of the design was the arrangement of the fire-box,
with a mid-feather, a combustion chamber, hollow stays for a free
supply of air to the fire-box, and the cutting away of the bottom of
the fire-box to obtain clearance for the cranks and yet retain a low
centre of gravity with large driving wheels. Assertion to the contrary
notwithstanding, it should be observed that so much did McConnell
insist upon a low centre of gravity that he specially mentioned it in
his patent specification of February 28th, 1852.
A more particular description of the fire-box, etc., is requisite. It
extended into the cylindrical portion of the boiler a distance of 4ft.
9in., so that the boiler tubes were only 7ft. long. The whole length
of the fire-box was 10ft. 6in.; depth at front-plate 6ft. 5in., at
door-plate 6ft. 10in.; length on fire-bars 5ft. 10¼in., thus leaving
4ft. 7¾in. for the portion over the axle and the combustion chamber. At
its narrow part (directly at the top of the recess above the driving
axle) the fire-box was only 2ft. 3in. in height; height at tube-plate
3ft. (beyond the cut away portion); width at tube-plate 3ft. 9in. It
will be noticed that Webb’s “Greater Britain” class of locomotives is
designed with the long fire-box and combustion chamber; but as Mr.
Webb, unlike McConnell, does not object to the high pitched boiler, the
former does not recess the boiler barrel for the purpose of obtaining
a low centre. Webb also divides his tubes into two sets by having
the combustion chamber between them. McConnell’s combustion chamber
was a continuation of the fire-box. We must now describe the general
appearance of this engine.
[Illustration: FIG. 64.—McCONNELL’S “300,” LONDON AND NORTH WESTERN
RAILWAY]
The cylinders were inclined upwards from the front, and the valve
chests were above them, below the smoke-box. Two Salter safety valves
were provided, encased within a sheet-brass covering of Stirling’s
Great Northern pattern. The steam pressure was 150lbs. The dome was
also of brass, with a hemispherical top surmounting the cylindrical
lower part. The steam regulator was at the mouth of the steam-pipe,
which was placed at the top of the dome (inside, of course).
The heating surface was: Tubes, 980 sq. ft.; fire-box, 260 sq. ft.
Wheel base, 16ft. 10in. Sufficient steam could be raised in 45 minutes
after lighting the fire to move the engine. Two of these engines
were built about the same time—one (No. 300) by Fairbairn and Co.,
Manchester, the other by E. B. Wilson and Co., Leeds. The orders were
given early in July, 1852, and the engines delivered the second week
in November, Wilson and Co. having occupied but eight weeks in the
construction of the one given to them.
Both engines were delivered at Wolverton on the same day, and on
Thursday, November 11th, 1852, Wilson’s engine was tried for the first
time, when on her first journey to Euston she attained a speed of 60
miles an hour.
It was soon found that “No. 300” and her sister engine were unable
to cover the 111 miles—Euston to Birmingham—in two hours, as
was confidently predicted, and the failure to do so was—perhaps
justly—attributed to the inferior condition of the permanent-way. On
March 8th, 1853, “No. 300” hauled a train of 34 carriages, weighing 170
tons, from Birmingham to London in three hours eight minutes, including
five stoppages. A similar train drawn by the “Heron” and “Prince of
Wales” took ten minutes longer to perform the same journey. These two
engines had cylinders 15in. by 20in., and 6ft. driving wheels. The
results of this trial are thus tabulated:—
--------------------+-----------+-----------+------------+----------
| | | Average | Maximum
| Coke. | Coke | speed | speed
| | per mile. | per hour. | per hour.
--------------------+-----------+-----------+------------+----------
No. 300 | 4,529 lb. | 40.8 lb. | 36.4 miles | 54
“Heron” & | 4,851 lb. | 43.7 lb. | 34.5 miles | 48
“Prince of Wales” | | | |
--------------------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------
Upon the result of this run it was claimed that McConnell’s patent
engines were considerably superior to two of the ordinary London and
North Western Railway locomotives, and one of Stephenson’s “long
boiler” abortions was altered by McConnell, being fitted up with his
patent combustion chamber, short tubes, and the other innovations, as
mentioned in our description of “No. 300.”
The “long boiler” originally had 1,013 sq. ft. of tube-heating surface;
when altered, the length of the tubes was reduced to 4¾ft., and some
additional ones were fixed diagonally across the combustion chamber. By
this alteration the tube-heating surface was reduced to 547 sq. ft.,
and the engine is stated to have drawn 170 tons at 60 miles an hour,
and to have attained a speed of 70 miles an hour with light trains.
From the working of this locomotive the following table (by which a
reduction of 23 per cent. in the amount of fuel consumed was claimed
for the altered engine) was prepared:—
--------+------+--------+-------------+----------+----------
|Miles |Average | Coke | Coke | Coke
| run. | load. | consumed. | per mile.| per ton
| | | | | per mile.
--------+------+--------+-------------+----------+----------
Original|29,442|115 tons|1,715,952 lb.|58·28 lb. |·564 lb.
Altered |12,060|144 tons|519,120 lb. |43·04 lb. |·298 lb.
--------+------+--------+-------------+----------+----------
But D. K. Clark’s paper on “Locomotive Boilers,” read before the
Institution of Civil Engineers, soon placed a very different complexion
upon the result of the trials between the ordinary and patent engines,
resulting in the “air-tubes” to the combustion chamber being speedily
abandoned. The attention of the directors of the London and North
Western Railway was called to the failure of these engines, with the
result that they ordered Messrs. Marshall and Wood to report on the two
classes of engines—viz., the ordinary London and North Western type and
McConnell’s patent locomotives. This report was ready in August, 1853,
but for some reason its publication was suppressed at the time, but
the directors countermanded the construction of other engines already
ordered on McDonnell’s patent principle.
In the summer of 1854 Marshall and Wood conducted another set of
experiments for the directors of the London and North Western Railway,
with the object of determining the relative value of coke and coal as
fuel for the locomotives.
The engines chosen were McConnell’s patent “No. 303” and the “Bloomer,”
No. 293. Double trips were run between Rugby and London daily for six
consecutive days, coal being burnt on three days and coke on the three
alternate days. The trains chosen were the 12.55 p.m. up and 5.45 p.m.
down.
It was found that 1lb. of coal evaporated 5.83lb. of water, and 1lb. of
coke 8.65lb. of water; but the monetary saving was 6s. 9d. per ton in
favour of coal.
McConnell’s patent engines were again condemned. Marshall and Wood’s
report concluded as follows: “Although we consider the experiments we
made with No. 303 engine satisfactory in point of smoke burning, we
cannot resist the belief that the consumption of coal is in excess
of what it ought to be, and that there is room for considerable
improvement in this respect, by means which shall tend to utilise the
heat which is at present wasted.”
The whole report is of great interest to the technical reader; it is,
however, too long to reproduce _in extenso_.
It is abundantly evident that there is no great pecuniary gain from
locomotive designing, or we should be treated to great law-suits
regarding the validity of the patents, such as have recently been
the case with pneumatic tyres and incandescent gas-burners. We have
already, upon more occasions than one, pointed out that certain
patented locomotive designs had previously been anticipated, although
the later patentees were probably unaware of the fact. We find this
to have been the case with McConnell’s “recessed” boiler locomotives
just described, for on December 2nd, 1846, W. Stubbs and J. J. Grylls,
of Llanelly, enrolled a design of locomotive. The specification in
question not only mentioned the recessing of the boiler for the purpose
of allowing the use of a large driving wheel and yet retaining a low
centre of gravity, but it even anticipated McConnell’s combustion
chamber between the fire-box and tubes. An adaptation of Bodmer’s
double piston motion was also specified by Stubbs and Grylls. The two
cylinders were placed below the boiler, four wheels being connected by
means of side-rods with the cross-heads of the two cylinders in such
a manner that from each cylinder two wheels were driven, by means of
a cross-head, and each cross-head, by means of two connecting-rods,
rotating the wheels. Another claim under this patent related to driving
a locomotive by eccentrics fitted with antifriction rollers as a
substitute for the ordinary cranks.
Although in the “Evolution of the Steam Locomotive” it is only
intended to describe locomotives for British railways, it may not
be out of place to mention an engine for a foreign railway, for two
reasons—first, because it was built by an English firm in England,
and, secondly, because it was tried on an English railway before
exportation. The “Ysabel” was constructed in 1853 by Dodds and Sons,
of Rotherham, for the “Railway of Isabella II. from Santander to Abar
del Rey,” and was tried on the Lickey incline of 1 in 37 for two miles,
under the direction of Mr. Stalvies, the locomotive superintendent at
Broomsgrove. The “Ysabel” had four-coupled wheels 4ft. 6in. diameter;
cylinders, 14¼in. by 20in. stroke; 137 tubes, 1⅞in. diameter, and 11ft.
3in. in length, and was fitted with Dodds’ patent wedge expansive
motion, which required only two eccentrics. For the purpose of easy
transportation, the “Ysabel” was so constructed that when disconnected
no single portion weighed more than six tons; in addition to the
fittings necessary to secure the boiler, the only connections between
it and the frames, machinery, etc., were the steam-pipe and the two
feed-pump connections. When tried upon the Lickey bank this locomotive
hauled six trucks weighing 45 tons 12¾ cwt. up the two miles one
furlong in 12 minutes 12 seconds, and with a train weighing 29 tons 4¼
cwt. the incline was negotiated in seven minutes five seconds.
The compound locomotive is not quite so modern an invention as is
popularly supposed, for, putting aside the suggestion emanating in 1850
from John Nicholson, an Eastern Counties Railway engine-driver, whose
plan of continuous expansion is generally accepted as the foundation of
the compound system, we find that in 1853 a Mr. Edwards, of Birmingham,
patented a “duplex” or in other words a compound engine, the steam,
after working in a high-pressure cylinder, being used over again in a
low-pressure one. The cylinders were so placed that the dead centre in
one occurred when the other piston was at its maximum power.
In 1853 Beattie constructed for the London and South Western Railway
at Nine Elms Works, the “Duke,” No. 123, a six-wheel “single” express
engine; driving wheels, 6ft. 6in. diameter; L. and T. 3ft. 6in.
diameter; cylinders, 16in. by 21in. stroke. The weight was arranged in
an extraordinary manner, 10 tons 9 cwt. being on the leading axle, only
9 tons 9 cwt. on the driving axle, and 5 tons 11 cwt. on the trailing
axle. The wheel base was, L. to D., 6ft. 8½in.; D. to T., 7ft. 6in.
The “Duke” had a raised fire-box, surmounted by a large dome similar
to that of the “Hercules,” whilst another dome was located on the
centre of the boiler barrel. The shape of this centre dome resembled a
soup-tureen turned upside down.
At this point we take the opportunity to briefly describe a railway
locomotive which, although not propelled by steam, deserves to be
mentioned as an initial attempt at railway haulage by means of
compressed air.
The engine in question was constructed by Arthur Pasey, and was tried
on the Eastern Counties Railway in July, 1852. This machine was, in
point of size and power, nothing more than a model, the dimensions
being: Cylinders, 2½in. diameter, 9in. stroke; driving wheels, 4ft.
diameter; weight, 1½ tons; air capacity of reservoirs, 39 cubic ft.
[Illustration: FIG. 65.—PASEY’S COMPRESSED AIR LOCOMOTIVE, TRIED ON THE
EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY IN 1852]
By reference to the illustration (Fig. 65) it will be seen that this
curious little locomotive had the six wheels of 4ft. diameter within
the frames, and the horizontal cylinders outside the frames, and
actuating the centre pair of wheels. Above the frames was placed a
cylindrical air reservoir, with egg shaped ends. This extended from
the buffer beam at one end of the vehicle to the leading axle, a
distance of about 12ft. The remainder of the space, about 4ft., was
occupied by the pressure-reducing and other apparatus, and afforded
a place of vantage for those in charge of the machine. The reservoir
was constructed to withstand a pressure of 200lb., but the engine was
only pressed to 165lb., and this at the time of the trial at Stratford
was reduced to 20lb. working pressure. With a load of eight people,
the engine ran the four miles, Stratford to Lea Bridge and back, in
30 minutes. The incident of the trial so aroused the curiosity of
the men engaged at the Stratford Works, that they all left their
employment for the purpose of witnessing the trial of so great an
innovation as Pasey’s compressed air locomotive. For this reason no
further trials could be held at Stratford, but on July 2nd a second
trip was made at Cambridge, and on this occasion, with six passengers,
the following results were recorded: Starting from the 60th mile-post
near the Waterbeach Junction, with a working pressure of 15lb. per sq.
in., the first mile was covered in five minutes. By increasing the
pressure on the pistons, the second mile was covered in four minutes;
the pressure was then reduced to 18.85lb., and 3½ additional miles
were covered in ten minutes. The designer of this little machine gives
eight reasons by which he apparently succeeds—at all events to his
own satisfaction—in proving the great superiority of compressed air
traction over that of steam. Unfortunately for Mr. Pasey’s theory,
steam is still triumphant, and compressed air dead—or nearly so—for
tractive purposes.
[Illustration: FIG. 66.—THE FIRST TYPE OF GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY
PASSENGER ENGINE, ONE OF THE “LITTLE SHARPS”]
The opening of the Great Northern Railway next claims our attention.
The first locomotives were supplied by contract, an order for 50
passenger engines having been given to Sharp Bros. and Co. These were
six-wheel single engines (Fig. 66), the driving wheels being 5ft. 6in.
diameter. The cylinders were 15in. by 20in. stroke. Weight of engine,
loaded, 18 tons 8½ cwt. These engines were called “Little Sharps,” and
(Fig. 66) is an illustration of one of them.
We will now describe the famous “No. 215” (Fig. 67) of the Great
Northern Railway, designed towards the end of 1852 by Mr. Archibald
Sturrock, constructed by Hawthorn and Co., Newcastle, and delivered to
the Great Northern Railway on August 6th, 1853.
Fortunately, Mr. Sturrock has supplied the writer with complete and
authentic details, together with a drawing, of this engine, so that
readers may rely upon the information being strictly accurate, although
it should be noted that it does not correspond in several particulars
with other statements concerning “No. 215” that have been published.
It is a matter of railway history that in 1852 the “Gladstone” award
settled the great rivalry existing at that period between the London
and North Western and Great Northern Railways. The competition had
been carried on in a manner still in favour in American railroad
warfare—viz., the cutting of rates and fares; but Mr. Gladstone having
decided this point, the Great Northern Railway introduced the method of
rivalry now universally recognised as English railway competition—that
is, trial of speed. Mr. Sturrock, with the experience gained under the
daring broad-gauge leaders, was, of course, conversant with what a
locomotive could do, and his published reasons for the construction of
“No. 215” are as follow:—
[Illustration: FIG. 67.—STURROCK’S MASTERPIECE, THE FAMOUS G.N.R. “215”]
“This engine was constructed to prove to the directors of the Great
Northern Railway that it was quite practicable to reach Edinburgh
from King’s Cross in eight hours, by only stopping at Grantham, York,
Newcastle, and Berwick. This service was not carried out, because there
was no demand by travellers for, nor competition amongst, the railways
to give the public such accommodation.”
Although delayed for 35 years, the demand for such a service arose in
1888, and Mr. Sturrock then had the satisfaction of seeing runs such
as he had built “No. 215” to perform become daily accomplished facts.
It should be noted that when “No. 215” was originally built, she was
fitted with a leading bogie, such an arrangement being a principal
feature of Mr. Sturrock’s original design for the engine. The bogie
and trailing wheels were 4ft. 3in. diameter, the driving wheels being
7ft. 6in. diameter; the cylinders were inside, and had a diameter of
17½in., with a stroke of 24in. The heating surface was large, this
being another of the strong points in Mr. Sturrock’s design. Tubes,
1,564 sq. ft.; fire-box, 155.2 sq. ft.; total heating surface, 1,718.2
sq. ft. The weight was, empty, 32 tons 11 cwt. 2 qr.; in working order,
37 tons 9 cwt. 2 qr. Wheel base, 21ft. 8½in. Water capacity of tender,
2,505 gallons. The frames and axle bearings were outside; the latter
were curved above the driving axle, as in the broad-gauge “Lord of the
Isles” type.
The boiler and raised fire-box were also after the same pattern. The
engine had no dome, but an encased safety valve on the fire-box—a
further evidence of attention to the Swindon practice. Compensation
beams connected the two pairs of bogie wheels, and the underhung
springs of the driving wheels were also connected with the trailing
axle springs by means of compensation levers. “No. 215” frequently ran
at 75 miles an hour. She appears to have been broken up about 29 years
back, for in 1870 Mr. Stirling built an engine, “No. 92,” in which
he used the 7ft. 6in. driving wheels of Mr. Sturrock’s famous “215.”
Engine No. 92, is still at work, so that the driving wheels must be 45
years old. A comparison of Mr. Sturrock’s “215” with McConnell’s “300”
will show the immense superiority of the former, especially with regard
to the amount of heating surface, the pitch of the boiler, and the
bogie in place of the rigid wheel base.
[Illustration: FIG. 68.—PEARSON’S 9FT. “SINGLE” TANK ENGINE, BRISTOL
AND EXETER RAILWAY]
In the last chapter, Mr. Pearson’s initial patent for a locomotive was
described, and a description of his famous double-bogie tank engines,
with 9ft. “single” driving wheels, is given below. The design (Fig.
68), which was brought out in 1853, was a modification of the patent
specification already alluded to. The engines were constructed by
Rothwell and Co., Union Foundry, Bolton-le-Moors, and were famous for
the low average cost for repairs and fuel consumption per mile run;
indeed, a feature of most of the broad-gauge locomotives was the low
average cost of maintenance and working. The ends of the frames were
supported on a four-wheel bogie, the wheels of which were 4ft. in
diameter, and the driving wheels 9ft. diameter; these latter had no
flanges. The cylinders (the ends of which projected beyond the front
of the smoke-box) were 16½in. diameter and 24in. stroke; the driving
axle was above the frame. The boiler was 10ft. 9in. long and 4ft. ½in.
diameter; it contained 180 brass tubes of one and thirteen-sixteenths
inch external diameter. The steam pressure was 130lb. No dome was
provided, and the Salter safety valves were located on the top of the
fire-box and enclosed by a brass casing. The weight of the engine, in
working order, was 42 tons. The water was stored in three tanks, one
beneath the boiler, another below the fire-box, and the usual well
tank, behind the foot-plate. The two suspended tanks were connected by
means of a stuffing-box jointed pipe, which was continued to the bottom
of the wheel tank, so that the water in the three tanks was thus able
to pass from one tank to any other one. The feed pumps were worked from
the piston-rod cross-head, and the feed-pipes passed along behind the
splashers to the boiler. To steady the suspended tanks, link-rods were
passed between the two. There were also “bogie safety links” connecting
the bogie frames with the main frame at each end, and similar links
connected the suspended tanks with the other ends of the bogie frames.
These links were each fitted with india-rubber disc buffers, to allow
of the necessary elastic working. The parts were thus so strongly
linked together, that should a bogie centre-pin break, or should the
bogie movement fail in any way, the wheels would still remain in their
right position. The whole of the springs were of the india-rubber disc
kind. Those of the driving axle presented some remarkable peculiarities.
They were double, an elastic connection being formed between the boiler
and the axle-boxes by large plate brackets projecting from the boiler
barrel, and carrying centre studs for a short double-armed lever; each
end of this lever had a separate spring-box attached to it by a long
link.
The inner spring-box worked down behind the disc plate of the driving
wheel splashers, whilst the outer one worked parallel to it, outside
the driving wheel.
The springs for the other wheels were all beneath their axles, and were
very compact and neat in appearance. The brake action was confined to
the after bogie, all four wheels being used for the frictional effect,
the sliding bars carrying the brake blocks being actuated in reverse
directions by a screw spindle, which carried a winch to be worked by
the driver.
[Illustration: FIG. 69.—ONE OF PEARSON’S 9FT. “SINGLE” TANKS, TAKEN
OVER BY THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY]
The regulator valve was a slide, worked in a simple and certainly a
convenient manner by a short lever, set on a pillar stud on the front
of the fire-box, and passing through a slot in the end of the slide
spindle. This was a far more effective plan of working the valve than
the ordinary rotatory handle.
These engines were remarkable for their steady running at high speeds,
80 miles an hour and over being a daily performance of the engines on
certain portions of the main line between Exeter and Bristol.
One reason for the freedom from excessive oscillation for which these
engines were famous was attributable to the 9ft. driving wheels, and
the slow piston velocity arising therefrom; thus with 6ft. wheels at a
speed of 60 miles an hour, the pistons have to make no less than 280
double strokes per minute without making allowance for “slip.” With the
9ft. driving wheels the double piston strokes per minute at 60 miles
an hour fall to 186, and consequently with so considerable a reduction
in the movements of the reciprocating and rotating machinery of the
locomotive, it is only reasonable to expect and obtain a much more
steady movement of the machine.
In the matter of coal consumption the engines were no less successful.
Writing in August, 1856, Mr. Pearson reported: “Engine No. 40 has run
81,790 miles since her delivery in October, 1853, and has consumed 794
tons 17 cwt. 2 qr. of coke, or 21.76lb. per mile; the repairs as yet
have been very trifling, consisting chiefly of re-turning the tyres.
This engine has been working passenger trains on the main line almost
the whole of the time since she was delivered. Our mileage is rather
heavy, each engine averaging 750 miles per week.”
After 1876, when the Bristol and Exeter Railway was amalgamated with
the Great Western Railway and the former company’s locomotive stock
became the property of the latter, 4 of the 8 original 9ft. tank
engines then in existence were rebuilt, and their character and design
entirely remodelled. The diameter of the driving wheels was reduced to
8ft., and tyres fitted to them, a pair of trailing wheels were provided
in place of the rear bogie, and a separate tender was added, the tanks
being done away with. The B. and E.R. numbers of these engines were
39 to 46. The G.W.R. numbered the four taken over 2001 to 2004. The
latter was hauling the “Flying Dutchman” when the Long Ashton accident
happened on July 27th, 1876. It was in consequence of this disaster
that the engines were rebuilt with 8ft. wheels. In concluding this
sketch of Pearson’s famous broad-gauge double tanks, we may state that
until recent years, when phenomenally high locomotive speeds have been
recorded, these engines held the “blue ribbon” in that respect with an
authenticated speed of 81 miles an hour. Figures 69 and 70 represent
them as rebuilt.
[Illustration: FIG. 70.—A BRISTOL & EXETER RAILWAY TANK ENGINE, AS
REBUILT (WITH TENDER) BY THE G.W.R.]
The Furness Railway Company is certainly notorious for the manner in
which it preserves its locomotives; not only has it the two old Bury
engines (already described) yet in active service, but there are still
at work on the same Company’s iron roads other engines manufactured
as long ago as 1854. These locomotives are first cousins to Bury’s
four wheel (coupled) goods engines; they were built by Fairbairn, of
Manchester, and have cylinders 15in. diameter, with a stroke of 24in.
Of course, they are technically inside cylinder—i.e., of the Bury
“inside” type, with the cylinders within the frames, but below the
smoke-box, instead of within it. The cylinders are, in fact, but a few
inches above rail level; they incline upwards, and the connecting-rods
pass beneath the leading axle and actuate the trailing axle; the four
wheels are 4ft. 9in. diameter, and are coupled by means of round
section side-rods; the wheel base is 7ft. 9in.; the frames are of the
inside bar pattern; the fire-box is round, with circular top, and
surmounted by a double Salter safety valve. The boiler is 11ft. 2in.
long and of 3ft. 11in. mean diameter; it contains 148 tubes, 2in.
diameter. The total heating surface is 940 sq. ft.; steam pressure,
120lb.; weight of engine in working order, 22½tons. There is no dome on
the boiler; but some modern attachments have been fixed on the upper
portion of the round fire-box, the steam pressure gauge being very
noticeable. The tender is supported on four wheels of 3ft. diameter,
the wheel base being 8ft., capacity of tank 1,000 gallons, and coal
space 100ft.; weight in working order, 14½ tons. The tender has outside
frames, and the brake actuates blocks to both sides of the four wheels.
These engines are used for working goods and mineral traffic over the
Furness Railway. The particular engine we have been describing is “No.
9.”
“Ovid” (Fig. 71) represents a type of bogie saddle-tank engines, with
four-coupled wheels, designed by D. Gooch for working the passenger
trains on the steep inclines of the South Devon Railway. The cylinders
were 17in. diameter, with a stroke of 24in. The coupled wheels were
5ft. in diameter. Weight, in working order, 38½ tons, Steam pressure,
120 lbs. per square inch. “Ovid” was built by Hawthorn in 1854.
“Plato” (Fig. 72) was one of the six-coupled banking engines, designed
by Gooch for the South Devon Railway. She was built at Swindon in 1854.
The steam pressure, cylinders, stroke, and weight were the same as in
the “Ovid” class. The wheels were 5ft. in diameter. The tanks contained
740 gallons of water. The rectangular projection in front of the
smoke-box is the sand-box!
Neilson and Co., of the Hyde Park Works, Glasgow, produced in 1855 a
type of outside cylinder goods engine. Readers will remember that at
that period goods locomotives were not necessarily of the six or eight
wheels coupled description; they more generally had but the leading and
driving wheels coupled. This type of engine, it will be remembered, is
now usually described as “four-coupled in front” or a “mixed traffic”
engine. The locomotive in question was built for the Edinburgh and
Glasgow Railway, and was numbered “353” in Neilson and Co.’s books.
[Illustration: FIG. 71.—“OVID,” A SOUTH DEVON RAILWAY SADDLE TANK
ENGINE, WITH LEADING BOGIE]
The boiler was of considerable length, and appeared longer from the
fact that the fire-box top was not raised, so that a long, unbroken
line of boiler top met the eye, relieved at the extremity of the
fire-box end by being surmounted by an immense steam dome, on the top
of which was fixed an enclosed Salter safety valve. The horizontal
outside cylinders were below the foot-plate side frames, located as
usual at the smoke-box end. Their diameter was 16in. and stroke 22in.
The coupled wheels were 5ft. and the trailing wheels 3ft. 6in. diameter.
The frames were “inside,” and the driving and leading wheels were
provided with inside bearings only, but by a curious practice of
bolting on to the main frames—at about the middle of the fire-box—an
elongated portion, which curved outwards, the trailing wheels were
provided with outside bearings. The rams actuating the boiler
feed pumps were simply extensions of the piston-rods, the pumps being
fixed between the leading and driving wheels. The engine was provided
with a steam-pressure gauge, fixed on a vertical pillar over the top of
the fire-box—indeed, in much the same position the steam gauge still
occupies, save that “No. 353” had no cab or weather-board, and it
therefore appeared singular to see the gauge in the place indicated.
[Illustration: FIG. 72.—“PLATO,” A SIX-COUPLED SADDLE TANK BANKING
ENGINE, SOUTH DEVON RAILWAY]
Rotatory valves for locomotives are almost annual “inventions,” and as
old friends as the “biggest gooseberry” and “sea serpent,” which appear
regularly year by year. Under such circumstances, we may be excused for
giving an account of Locking and Cook’s patent rotatory valve, fixed
to the York and North Midland Railway engine, “No. 48,” on January
26th, 1854, and taken out in May of the same year, the locomotive in
the interim having run 10,000 miles. “No. 48” was used on the Hull and
Bridlington branch; and although she was an old engine, having been
built for the Hull and Selby Railway in 1840, yet with the rotatory
valve, good old “48” is stated to have consumed 20 per cent. less coke
than a modern engine doing the same work on the same branch; we also
read that when the valve was removed no perceptible wearing was to be
noticed. We are not, however, aware that “No. 48” or any other of the
York and North Midland Railway locomotives were afterwards fitted with
Locking and Cook’s patent rotatory valves.
Mr. G. Tosh, locomotive superintendent of the Maryport and Carlisle
Railway, designed in 1854 a powerful goods engine to work the heavy
mineral traffic over the railway. This engine had six-coupled wheels,
4ft. 7in. diameter; cylinders, 16¾in. by 22in. stroke; heating
surface—tubes, 1,181ft.; fire-box, 84ft.; total, 1,265 sq. ft.; steam
pressure, 120lb.; weight, 26 tons 12 cwt.; cost, £2,175. She hauled
a train of 100 loaded wagons, weighing 445 tons, for a distance of
28 miles in 1¾ hours. The line is of a very undulating character,
including an ascent nine miles long, one mile of which is 1 in 192. The
wagons were borrowed from the Newcastle and Carlisle Railway, and the
100 only weighed 172 tons, or an average of less than 1¾ tons each.
The dead weight of mineral wagons has largely increased since 1854,
although it is to be feared their carrying capacity has not increased
in the same proportion.
[Illustration: FIG. 73.—THE FIRST TYPE OF NARROW-GAUGE PASSENGER
ENGINES ON THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY]
About this time, the growth of narrow-gauge lines in the districts
served by the G.W.R., together with the amalgamations and alliances
of narrow-gauge railways with the G.W.R., made it necessary for the
latter railway to provide narrow-gauge engines. Fig. 73 represents one
of the first narrow-gauge Great Western locomotives. It will be seen
that Daniel Gooch introduced all his well-known features into these
engines. These locomotives were built by Beyer, Peacock, and Co. The
“single” driving wheels were 6ft. 6in. diameter, the cylinders being
15½in. diameter, and the stroke 22in. Compensation levers connected the
leading and driving springs.
[Illustration: FIG. 74.—“ROBIN HOOD,” A BROAD-GAUGE EXPRESS ENGINE,
WITH COUPLED WHEELS 7FT. IN DIAMETER]
In 1855 Sir D. Gooch designed a class of coupled express broad-guage
engines for the Great Western Railway. These engines had a group of
four leading wheels, like the “Lord of the Isles” class. The driving
and trailing wheels were coupled, and were 7ft. in diameter. At that
time, no coupled wheels of so large a diameter had been constructed.
The cylinders were 17in. diameter, with a 24in. stroke. R. Stephenson
and Co. built the engines, of which there were 10. They were a most
successful class of engine, and ran about 500,000 miles each before
being “scrapped.” “Robin Hood” (Fig. 74) was one of these engines. By
reference to the illustration, it will be seen that the tender was
fitted with the sentinel box for the “travelling porter” that formerly
accompanied the G.W. broad-gauge expresses.
Fig. 75 represents the inspection or cab engine of the N.B.R., it is
numbered 879, and was originally built by Messrs. Neilson and Co.,
in 1850, for the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway. She is now used for
inspection purposes. The cylinders are 10in. diameter by 15in. stroke.
Other dimensions are: Wheels, leading and trailing, 3ft. diameter;
driving, 5ft. diameter; wheel base, 15ft. 8in.; centre of leading to
centre of driving, 10ft. 8in.; centre of driving to centre of trailing,
5ft. Tubes, No. 88, 1¾in. diameter outside. Heating surface: Tubes, 324
sq. ft.; fire-box, 35 sq. ft.; total, 359 sq. ft. Fire-grate, 5 sq.
ft. Weight, in working order, 22 tons 1cwt. 3qrs. Tank capacity, 426
gallons.
[Illustration: FIG. 75.—NORTH BRITISH RAILWAY INSPECTION ENGINE, No.
879]