Castle class

[Keith George]

Can anyone tell me which W.R. early Castle class  loco's ended their working days still retaining the original scalloped inside cylinder cover.?

 

Thank you,  Keith.

[OnTheBranchline]

Can anyone tell me which W.R. early Castle class  loco's ended their working days still retaining the original scalloped inside cylinder cover.?

 

Thank you,  Keith.

 

Look for the member who has the same name as the engine type you are asking about, he would be able to tell you.

[Keith George]

Look for the member who has the same name as the engine type you are asking about, he would be able to tell you.

 

Thanks for that idea,

 

Keith.

[Coppercap]

All that were built with them (4073 to 5012) I should think. I don't recall reading that any had new inside cylinders fitted of the later pattern. (The cover you can see is actually over the valves - the cylinders are under the running plate.) I'm sure Castle will be along some time - he's probably busy at Didcot right now...

[The Stationmaster]

All that were built with them (4073 to 5012) I should think. I don't recall reading that any had new inside cylinders fitted of the later pattern. (The cover you can see is actually over the valves - the cylinders are under the running plate.) I'm sure Castle will be along some time - he's probably busy at Didcot right now...

 

Some of the early batch with joggled frames acquired new front ends with straight frames and new rectangular inside covers while some with straight frames also acquired new inside cylinders or at least the revised covers

[Coppercap]

Some of the early batch with joggled frames acquired new front ends with straight frames and new rectangular inside covers while some with straight frames also acquired new inside cylinders or at least the revised covers

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that - now I'll have to go through lots of my books sometime to look for some photos! I did know many of the Stars were given new cylinders in later life, but not Castles.

 

Edit: found two so far - 4088 Dartmouth Castle, 4080 Powderham Castle.

Also, arguably, 4082 Windsor Castle which famously swapped identities with 7013 Bristol Castle...

Edited March 17, 2018 by Coppercap

[slilley]

4073 and 4079 have the original style of cylinder covers still as I recall, though they have the later style steam pipes possibly.

 

Simon

[Keith George]

I thought that the majority of the 4073 to 5012 build had their inside cylinder covers replaced to the squared off design during their later days of operation.

 

I had realised that 4073 and 4079 had retained the scalloped cylinder covers but not sure what others [if any] also retained them to the end.

 

4082 definitely received the later cylinder covers as did 4088. [photographic evidence]

 

Keith

[Keith George]

I thought that the majority of the 4073 to 5012 build had their inside cylinder covers replaced to the squared off design during their later days of operation.

 

I had realised that 4073 and 4079 had retained the scalloped cylinder covers but not sure what others [if any] also retained them to the end.

 

4082 definitely received the later cylinder covers as did 4088. [photographic evidence]

 

Keith

 

Also just found photographic evidence of 4037, 4074,4082,4076,4087,4088,4090, 5000,5008, having received the later cylinder covers.

[Coppercap]

I thought that the majority of the 4073 to 5012 build had their inside cylinder covers replaced to the squared off design during their later days of operation.

 

I had realised that 4073 and 4079 had retained the scalloped cylinder covers but not sure what others [if any] also retained them to the end.

 

4082 definitely received the later cylinder covers as did 4088. [photographic evidence]

 

Keith

4082 as withdrawn with late-type covers, was actually 7013 as built. 7013, a much later engine, was built with late-type covers, but was withdrawn with early covers (as it was built as 4082). That's how the switch (for the King's funeral train) was noticed so readily - they were from different build batches.

[Coppercap]

Also just found photographic evidence of 4037, 4074,4082,4076,4087,4088,4090, 5000,5008, having received the later cylinder covers.

Only 4073 to 5012 were built with early covers, as I previously said. 4037 was built as a Star, and was rebuilt as a Castle with new cylinders.

Edited March 17, 2018 by Coppercap

[Keith George]

Only 4073 to 5012 were built with early covers, as I previously said. 4037 was built as a Star, and was rebuilt as a Castle with new cylinders.

 

Yes, I am fully aware that 4037 was built as a Star. Just as I am fully aware that the vast majority of the 4073-5012 group received squared off cylinder covers in later life.

 

In your first post on the subject you stated that all of that group that were built with scalloped covers carried them right through their existence I and most others know that is not true

 

All was looking for was the I.D of the few that retained them to the end.

 

There is no room for guesswork on the forum, only facts. If I am not 100% sure of anything I would not dream of posting a reply to any question.

 

This may come over as argumentive but it is not meant to be  like that. I was just answering how you answered about 4037.

 

Keith

[Coppercap]

Yes, I am fully aware that 4037 was built as a Star. Just as I am fully aware that the vast majority of the 4073-5012 group received squared off cylinder covers in later life.

 

In your first post on the subject you stated that all of that group that were built with scalloped covers carried them right through their existence I and most others know that is not true

 

All was looking for was the I.D of the few that retained them to the end.

 

There is no room for guesswork on the forum, only facts. If I am not 100% sure of anything I would not dream of posting a reply to any question.

 

This may come over as argumentive but it is not meant to be like that. I was just answering how you answered about 4037.

 

Keith

Sorry (no I'm not actually), I must have missed reading in the rules when I joined that only 100% accuracy was allowed, with no guesswork permitted, and that posters should only give the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth! This is a forum, for heaven's sake, not a law court!

You seemed 100% sure about 4082, but you are incorrect...

Edited March 17, 2018 by Coppercap

[Keith George]

Sorry (no I'm not actually), I must have missed reading in the rules when I joined that only 100% accuracy was allowed, with no guesswork permitted, and that posters should only give the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth! This is a forum, for heaven's sake, not a law court!

You seemed 100% sure about 4082, but you are incorrect...

 

Guesswork can be very misleading, people could take it as fact. I am fully aware that 4082 and 7013 changed identities in Feb 1952, my Grand father died on the same day as King George V1.

 

I do not know your age as you have not entered it in your profile, but I was already trainspotting in 1952, were you.?

[Andy Y]

I was already trainspotting in 1952, were you.?

You do have a track record of making acidic comments, can you please rein it in?

[Keith George]

You do have a track record of making acidic comments, can you please rein it in?

 

I simply do not see anything acidic in what I posted.  I am  simply a great believer in the truth and facts, not in guesswork.

[Andy Y]

I am  simply a great believer in the truth and facts, not in guesswork.[/i]

When I have nothing to do I will backtrack to various acidic comments you have made over the years which are opinion rather than facts.

[Keith George]

When I have nothing to do I will backtrack to various acidic comments you have made over the years which are opinion rather than facts.

 

Aye Aye sir

[Castle]

Can anyone tell me which W.R. early Castle class  loco's ended their working days still retaining the original scalloped inside cylinder cover.?

 

Thank you,  Keith.

Hi Keith,

 

Right, as has been said - not all of them made it all the way with the scalloped or Vauxhall type inside cylinder valve covers. There are of course two types of the Vauxhall style cover. The early narrow version is on what I like to think of as the Castles with the Star style joggled front frames. Think of this as your Mk. 1 Castle. Your Mk. 2 Castle is the first type with ‘standard’ straight through frames with the dish to allow clearance for the front bogie wheels to turn. These had a new wider inside cylinder block and as a result their Vauxhall style cover was wider too. So the first point is I assume you mean the Mk 1 batch (4073 - 4092) and not the Mk. 2 batch (4093 - 5012).

 

As has been pointed out, Star conversions complicate things a bit but I also assume we are talking thoroughbred Castles here... Before we get into it - yes, all the preserved Castles have the later curve/curve style outer cylinder steam pipes. The earlier ones which were curve/straight/curve were prone to fractures and were replaced as a matter of course. The list of Mk. 1Castle Vauxhall front retention as I can best see it goes like this although this is a quick scan through a couple of books and is open to being wrong! Looking through the list, Nos. 73 & 79 were REALLY lucky to survive with the original look! There are lots of other stuff that changed too and if you want to know the full story then all the loco histories are presented in Ian Sixsmith’s excellent tome - ‘The Book of the Castles’, Irwell Press, ISBN 978-1-906919-04-7. All of the shed, boiler and tender allocations of all 171 are in there.

 

I hope this helps and if there are any more questions or revisions to my list please shout out. I’ve put a question mark next to the ones I’m not sure over with a cursory glance.

 

All the best,

 

Castle

 

4073 - Y

4074 - N

4075 - Y

4076 - N

4077 - N

4078 - N

4079 - Y

4080 - N

4081 - Y

4082 - It’s sort of complicated! The engine withdrawn as 4082 (really 7013) N and the engine withdrawn as 7013 (really 4082) N. Actually, as they both were withdrawn without, I guess it isn’t complicated. I’ll get my coat...

4083 - Y?

4084 - Y

4085 - N

4086 - Y

4087 - N

4088 - N

4089 - N

4090 - N

4091 - Y

4092 - Y?

[Keith George]

Thanks very much Castle for that excellent reply, that clears up my question admirably.

 

Regards,  Keith.

[Castle]

No worries!

 

All the best,

 

Castle

[Clearwater]

No worries!

 

All the best,

 

Castle

Hi Castle

 

In the long list of odd ones out, does 111 Viscount Churchill have anything unusual about it? I know 4000 has a higher running plate for example.

 

David

[Castle]

Hi David,

 

Now we are into the oddities! The thing to remember about No. 111 is that very little of the original locomotive remained after the 1924 rebuild. Some say that it was a portion of the frames were reused and others say new frames were used, making it more an ‘accountants rebuild’ type thing. One of the reasons for her rebuild was that the cylinders were worn and it needed a new boiler and therefore the opportunity was taken to make it a more standard and useful machine without the large weight penalty. Don’t forget that the Castles were more powerful than The Great Bear by 13% but had a far wider route availability. The locomotive was to all intents and purposes the same as what I have referred to as a ‘Mk. 1 Castle’. So much so that the works shot of No. 111 with its unique tender was dated as being taken in March 1924. Quite remarkable when you consider the engine wasn’t completed until September... It was definitely a production Castle in temporary disguise in that picture!

 

She had many of the modifications that all the fleet had during her career and I would recommend a photo of your chosen time period for accuracy. Unlike Nos. 4000 and 100 A1, she did receive a tool tunnel on the fireman’s side running plate as did all the other locos that weren’t built with it. Note that locos that had the tool tunnel added rather than being built with it, lost the vertical brass heading on the front of the cab. She was also built with bogie brakes but these disappeared fairly early on. No. 4079’s were gone by the time she was on the LNER in 1925. One of the reasons you don’t see it often modelled I suspect is that she went to the great shed in the sky fairly early on in 1953. The Hornby model of Caerphilly Castle would do for an early representation. Tender swaps would be required for later incarnations as per my model of No. 4079 which can be found on Little Didcot. She carried a Churchward 3,500 gallon until a light repair at Swindon in mid 1929. After that, according to the record, she was always paired with a Collett 4,000 gallon unit.

 

That’s enough wittering on from me!

 

All the best,

 

Castle

[The Stationmaster]

Hi Castle

 

In the long list of odd ones out, does 111 Viscount Churchill have anything unusual about it? I know 4000 has a higher running plate for example.

 

David

 

As I saw its driving wheels (in 1960) could I claim it as a 'cop'?  By then they had their third running number stamped on them. 

[Coppercap]

As I saw its driving wheels (in 1960) could I claim it as a 'cop'? By then they had their third running number stamped on them.

If you do, I suppose you could also claim to have 'copped' the other two engines that they were previously fitted to (even if numbers are crossed through)! Do you know what they were?

Edited March 20, 2018 by Coppercap