A lot of the "fast freight" intended steam locos turned out to be actually quite capable of high speed. Here in the US there are a few 2-8-4 types that have been known to regularly run above 70mph (consider that track limit in most places is 79mph)... Admittedly, the NKP S-2s do have 69" drivers vs the 9F's 60".
The German equivalents ( BR50 class) were considerably older than the 9F’s and lasted on DB till the end of steam in West Germany. I believe in the old East Germany they lasted longer on the DR.
I started on the footplate with BR in 1980 and fired a few mainline steam excursions. Proud to say I fired 92220 Evening Star on the mainline in 1986 on the EMI Express, a charter by EMI Records along with Green Arrow. Diesel hauled from wherever to Edinburgh then steam hauled Edinburgh to Gleneagles, EMI had basically taken over Gleneagles Hotel for the weekend. ECS run up to Perth then returned light locos to Edinburgh. Turning the locos on the dilapidated manual turntable in Perth yard was something else though, all they'd done was throw some oil on the pivots! Brilliant day apart from somebody nicking the lamps off the Evening Star when we stabled the locos in the bay platform at Perth station and had a break in the messroom.
It's interesting that theoretically, the 9F's could have run well into the 1990's. I wonder how they would have looked in British Rail liveries with the Double Arrow logo on them.
Yes. There were a few rail men who thought keeping steam locos longer and electrification of most of the network would have been a better modernisation plan. Evening Star was a loco that served not many years. As did others. Sad really. Especially when lots of the early diesels didn't last long. 😢
92134 is currently resident at the North York Moors Railway and is a great fit there, pulling long trains over hilly terrain with ease. There's a great video here on UA-cam from a recent steam gala showing it rescuing a failed train. It started 6 coaches full to standing, plus a failed Standard tank, uphill, and walked away like there was nothing on the drawbar. Amazing things.
Went to somewhere called Potters Bar and watching these on a straight piece of track (as I remember it) on freight trains/coal trains is something I will never forget. Strong impressive & good looking. Obviously killed off way before they should’ve been.
I spent many a time in the 1960s watching the Annesley 'runner' coal trains on the GC main line. The 9Fs regularly ran at 50mph on the return empty workings from Woodford. 50 unfitted loose coupled wagons at that speed was something to behold.
Very interesting. So the class 9F had a similar role like the German BR 50 (BR: Baureihe; serie) which had the same wheel configuration 2-10-0 . In West Germany (FRG) steam traction operation ended in 1977. In East Germany (GDR) those machines could have been used even in the 1980ies.
there were still some steam workings in East Germany after unification, even around Berlin as late as 1993. There was an article in one of the mags recently where a famous German tour operator was celebrating his birthday using a loco that was a sister loco of his favourite from the 90s in Berlin and it stated the last workings in service were 93/94. there was also a piece a few years ago about Col Steve Davies, who became head of the NRM, talking about his memories of a Berlin steam shed in 91/2/3 whilst he was a young officer posted to Berlin after reunification. To be fair the east only stopped using steam on top link expresses such as Berlin-Dresden in 1982
@@andrewyoung749 after German Reunification I can hardly imagine regular operation of steam locomotives to be continued - at least not by DR, even less by DB. There was some operation on some narrow track lines and for enthousiasts and tourists. The East German government wanted to end steam traction around 1980. However efforts of electrification of railway lines was lagging behind schedule, and then, after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, oil prices started rising which, after some time, caused the GDR to reactivate some of their steam locomotives since prices for coal were remaining stable. It was an early indicator of their economy and that of the entire COMECON wasn't doing great. Due to their invasion in Afghanistan the USSR couldn't offer oil at a cheaper price, nor did Romania.
It's great to learn that Dr. Costi and André Chapelon have been involved (at some stage) in the development of the Class 9F. It strikes me that in the UK such a class eventually came into development by BR, whereas it wasn't included in the development scheme of the Deutsche Bundesbahn (the West-German precursor of Deutsche Bahn). Nevertheless, the last official steam deployment schemes of DB (1977) involved heavy 2-10-0 engines, and those of DR (1988) in East-Germany lighter 2-10-0s. I admit: those pre-war designs had been equipped with new boilers (including some using the Franco-Costi design). Here in the Netherlands, Riddles' Austerity engines may have been the only 2-10-0s NS has ever had (not counting a few damaged German ones), and the last of these was withdrawn as early as 1952!
The 9F had considerably more power than almost all other freight engines in the UK preceding them, tractive effort being the same as the slightly larger German 2-10-0 Br50 but in horsepower as powerful as the German Heavy 2-10-0 Br44 which had three cylinders. Certainly one of the best Standard designs, on a shared first place with the Standard 2-6-4 4MT tanks in my opinion, as the 4MT tanks were very versatile and reliable locomotives too. Just a shame of the Franco Crosti experiment which was wasted effort as the exhaust steam injectors and double chimneys combined with optimised steam channels by Andre Chapelon made them already very efficient without the added complexity. Not mentioned but a big problem on the Franco Crosti system was the corrosion in the feedwater heater boiler, exhaust gasses cooled down far enough in these to have forming of sulphuric acid occurring eating away the boiler tubes.
For a country that once had a globe spanning empire, the incredible short-sited nature of successive post-war governments is truly astounding, and has been illustrated many times on this channel through the various downfalls of British transport and industry.
From the mid 1950s a lot of things in Britain became fashion driven. Steam had to go because it was seen as an old fashioned embarrassment, the same applied to Victorian housing stock.
It puts a new light on the vilification of diesels in the works of the Reverend Awdry: he was basically saying that not only were diesels as a technology not all they were cracked up to be, but that the way they went about transitioning was half baked. Look at how little quality control they had
When I was a "passed man" at Salisbury back in the '70's, I remember being upgraded for a driving turn. It was to ride on a steam loco. that wasn't even in steam but being towed back home to Cranmore after major boiler work. No problems there though, it turned out that the owner of the loco. was also riding on the footplate. Thats right David Shepherd, and what a pleasant down to earth bloke he was. Certainly that was one of my most memorable days on the railway.
It such a real & tragedy shame that these incredible giants of steam have to go to ‘you know where’ to be cut up as it would be nice to these locos in action right until the 1990s. The 9F are by far my only favourite largest BR Standard design locomotive and I support the group at Bluebell of the overhaul of 92240.
The blame lies with the cost of operating steam locomotives compared to diesel and electric locomotives coupled with the needs of the Clean Air Act of 1956.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 partly and in general yes. but i think it was a 'we want to be modern thing'. never discount how that plays in peoples minds. 'look at us, invest here, we are going forward'. obviously a lot of money could have been saved with diesel. but given the unions forced the maintenance of 2 man crews on diesels anyway that saving was delayed for decades. ultimately it probably cost loads compared to keeping steam for another decade and transitioning straight to electric.
@andrewyoung749 Well, as the Treasury was the only body funding the railways, the idea of modernising bring in investment doesn't fly. Modernising to save money would have been the only reason tge Treasury would have accepted. The Modernisation Plan called for a gradual replacement of steam traction. But for the Clean Air Act 1956, which made BR liable for a fine for each steam locomotive making excessive smoke, BR would have removed steam locomotives more gradually replacing them with thoroughly tested diesel and electric locomotives.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 the point of 'we are modern invest here' isn't so much specific to the railway as leveraging a modern image railway for general purposes of attracting inward investment. countries tend to hop on trends to show they are players, at the cutting edge and that people should put their money there. take brutalist architecture. Its clearly terrible. but all around the west a trademark way to show you were with the times was to tear down old stuff and replace it with concrete blocks. even south africa when isolated re apartheid was tearing down colonial stations and putting up rubbish brutalist ones to show 'we are here, we are in the game, we are with the times'. these days its glass and steel. countries follow silly trends. yes saving money is a good reason but did we actually save overall. as i said we had to keep 2 man crews anyway and a huge amount of money went up he wall on diesels.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 *TAX.* Over 40% of gross labour costs to employers consist of tax. This adversely affects all labour intensive activities, particularly transport, retailing and health care. In the public sector, it is simply a case of money in/money out.
It was a 9F that pulled me from Templecoombe to Bournemouth on my last trip over a part of the Somerset and Dorset. After that, I could only walk my dog (a collie cross, Brunel) up the empty formation from Blandford.
I was standing on the platform at Bournemouth West. A Saturday treat to hang around on cold draughty platforms waiting for S+DJR oddities. Two bob 8x10 prints of locos in the foyer as were often models of locos built by engineers from 4" to 15" guage. Site now occupied by Wessex Way which terminates one mile on at County Gates. Liberals controlling Poole in 1969 refused extending WsxWy to Alderney, Poole thus linking with the A35 to Dorchester. Traffic in the town has been a mess ever since. Politicians scoring points, eh?
What never ceases to astound me is the insular attitude of British Rail Designers...after WWII, was any of the German Kreigslok designs ( BR52 etc ) of 2-10-0 wheel arrangement, some of which continued running in Eastern Europe until the 2000s. Whilst there may have been some Loading Gauge issues ( Europe vs UK) but these could be overcome.
The truly baffling part to me is that the designers didn't think to ask steam holdouts across the pond what made their locos better. Looking at something like a later era Nickel Plate 2-8-4 (mid to late 1940s, the "last hurrah" of steam in the US) I can't quite understand why by the time the 9Fs were drawn up a decade later otherwise standard appliances like feedwater heaters or roller bearings weren't included by default.
In 1960 , BRs coal consumption was 90,200,000 tons. (Edit. Sorry 9 million not ninety)So they moved all that and the coal for power stations, export, steelworks, concrete works and domestic use. In one year.
Not certain about that, total UK production for 1960 was 198 million tonnes (195M Imp Tons) I can't see a figure for our considerable exports but you are saying BR consumed just under half of everything produced. That includes exports, power generation, steel manufacture, gas manufacture (pre natural gas) concrete production, industry and domestic. That can't be right.
@@COIcultist just rechecked my source material in sep61 trains illustrated. Err, nine million tons. Not ninety. Red faces all round!! Still a bloody lot mind!
@@highdownmartin First of all Sir, thanks for replying and coughing to an error. It's a one decimal place error, and that has been done by more people and more times than I could ever guess. It's nice when people are sensible and honest with YT comments. I've had complex discussions with people that were brilliant, yet seen flame wars start from next to nothing. My advantage was having worked for the NCB and British Coal and produced figures on coal sales and also sold coal, the figures had a meaning beyond numbers to me. It shouldn't be underestimated what 9 million tonnes is. It is about 1.5 to 1.66 times the consumption of a 2GW coal-fired power station. Something like Fiddlers Ferry. In terms of production, it is 8 to 12 large modern collieries in the 1980s. I can't write anything more, I've being trying to reference articles to check figures, but the figures are preposterous. There were 2 (or 3) 2million tonne per year mines in the UK. Just looked up Kellingly Colliery, which I thought was one. A local paper mixes up a theoretical ability to wind 900 Tonne per hour and later says it produced 400,000 Tonnes plus on its best day. Despite the fact that even 900T times by 24 only reaches 21,600T. Nobody seems to understand, though emptied as one complete train, most MGR trains were split within the collieries for loading.
@@COIcultist great reply, volume production on this scale is fascinating, especially as the heritage movement uses about 60 thousand tons per year. Thanks.
A fine loco, easy running and free steaming. Fired many of them from Newton Heath to Yorkshire. After being bounced all over the place on the ubiquitous Austerities they were marvellous.
9F's.......Spaceships......bring back an old memory. I was on the disused station at Shirebrook West as a lad. A 9F loaded with coal wagons out of Shirebrook Colliery had pulled up with the semaphore signal, mounted on the road bridge, against her. My grandfather was driving her! 'Aye up grandad' 'Aye up lad. What yer doin' here on the station?' 'Oh just playing grandad. What does that handle do grandad, what is that glass thing for etc etc.' All explained. 'You know what grandad.' 'What lad.' 'It must be great to be a steam locomotive engine driver.' At this point the fireman leaning on his shovel responded. 'Aye lad, but first yer have to learn how to shovel three ton of this' pointing at the tender coal with the shovel, 'into this', opening the firebox doors with a mighty roar, 'while it's movin'" 'I still reckon that it must be great to be a steam locomotive engine driver.' The fireman looked at my grandad and said, 'What yer reckon Bill?' Grandad replied, 'I reckon a chip off the old block.' They both chuckled. At that point the semaphore signal changed to clear. The fireman at that point got hold of the side rails and leaned out. Looking me straight in the eyes he said, 'It won't be long before you're on the footplate sonny.' 'See yer grandad.' 'See yer later lad.' 'See yer mister.' 'See yer sonny.' They gave a whistle, and started off. I remember this like it was yesterday. The smell of the smoke, steam, and oil was wonderful. It is one of those memories that you never forget.
I'm imagining an alternate timeline where the 73 oil crisis hits earlier and these things are brought back to last into the early 80's, or where they were sold to a backwater 3rd world country that had coal reserves and a need for motive power not falling apart.
An excellent resume of an excellent loco. I have no idea why a decision was made to abruptly end all steam traction in 1968 rather than gradually phase out the freight haulage side. Passenger work was a different matter. Surely the cost of building replacement diesels of a power sufficient to match the 9Fs TE would have been more than keeping 9Fs on for heavy freight duties for say, the next 10 years even taking into account the maintenance costs of a steam loco as opposed to a diesel. I imagine also that the 9Fs were much less prone to failure than the diesels, being much simpler and easier to repair. One inconsequential point is that Evening Star hauled the last Pines Express over the Somerset and Dorset - (and unassisted)- on 8th September 1962.
The accountants didn’t want to pay for the maintenance of the infrastructure to support steam as well as having to pay for the new diesel and electric maintenance. As such made economic sense to move to diesel and electric as quick as possible. Even before World War 2 then the big 4 were looking at diesel and or electric as was recognised as thee future. After WW2 then most of continental infrastructure was gone and had to be built up so made more sense to go diesel and electric rather then spend money on steam infrastructure when was recognised as already outdated prior to WW2. UK however mainly had the steam infrastructure in place, abundant supply of coal etc so sticking with steam short term made more sense. However once decision made to go diesel and electric then you want to transition quickly.
@@michaelmcnally2331 And don't forget by the 1960s people increasingly didn't want to work in dirty unsafe environments. BR was finding it difficult to employ cleaners who would eventually go on to fire and then drive steam. Enthusiasts forget Steam was not glamorous, to many that worked on the railways. It was dirty, tiring and dangerous. For every railwayman that loved steam there were many that welcomed the cleanliness, ease and comfort of the modern railway. Let's be honest Steam was inefficient and less productive than the modern technology that replaced it. People love steam but most didn't have to work with it!
Interesting summing up at the end of the video: "... as a machine that is too large for most heritage railways... thus meaning that the operational future for the survivors is somewhat uncertain." 92134.... Now finished overhaul and in service at NYMR 92203... fundraising underway for the next overhaul at NNR 92212... late stages of overhaul at MHR 92214... only just out of traffic and GCR plan to do an overhaul 92240... beginning overhaul at Bluebell Six out of nine have run in preservation... five out of nine have an active future in preservation. Even if the other three never run again, its an impressive percentage!!!!
They actually reactivated them. According to their 5-year-plan steam train operation was supposed to end around 1980. I remember well when all of a sudden "Eisenbahn Magazin" reported that the GDR was starting to reactivate several types of steam locomotives due to rising oil prices. At least that caused a little wave of tourism in the GDR.
Thank goodness for that. Tornado’s boiler had to be manufactured at Meiningen as thankfully it still had the facility to do so. The boiler and spare for the 2-8-2 Mikado, currently under construction, were also fabricated there.
Very well explained. Imagine different versions of this class that BR didn't do, ok, what about a three-cylinder 9F, 71000 type valve gear( i can't spell it), a 2-8-2 or a tank version, a well tank design or side tank 2-10-2 or 4T?
I've always regarded these as my favourite steam locos, then I discovered on a visit to the NRM in the 1980s that I was outshopped on the same day as Evening Star. More recently I've had several great days out behind 92212 on the Mid Hants Line.
Standing at the bottom of a field off Bryant Road, Kettering (now a housing estate) in the late fifties I watched a coal train with three 9F's, one at the front, one in the middle and one at the rear, go by using whistle codes between them. I thought the train would never end A few years later whilst in the Harpenden Junction signal box I would watch from behind the lever frame these locos and also 8F's taking coal trains to London and returning with clanking empties.
Another fascinating video - had never heard of the Austerity 2-10-0. SR Leader aside, I often wonder what the next generation of British steam locos would have looked like if the move to diesel was delayed - are there any drawings/images of potential designs that never got off the drawing board?
I wonder if they would be permitted to run on mainlines here on the Continent. (Not our favourite suggestion, I assume.) After all, we have Riddle's 73755 on static display at the Spoorwegmuseum (Dutch national railway museum, at Utrecht).
Technical reasons - modern trackwork is unsuitable and derailments would be too frequent causing disruption. I'm sure even "The Powers That Be" would love to see it happen, but unfortunately it never is.
I seem to remember, from news of than ban at the time, the reason they cannot be used on the main line is due to the check-rails which would be fowled by the centre (flangeless) driving wheels due to the 5 sets in a rigid line.
Agreed, particularly in view of the unions refusing to lose the firemen until they retired. The net savings from bringing forward the end of steam can't have been that great, because they had to build diesel locos much faster than they would have done had they allowed the newer steam designs (like the 9Fs) to work out their designed service lives. It would be interesting to run a comparison of these two economic scenarios.
@@CC-Cobalt-1043 even though this is somwhat un-related to how long steam should have lasted, I realised a few years ago that if Beeching never swung his axe, there’s a good chance heritage railways would have never existed and thus a lot more locomotives & rolling stock would have fell victim the Cutter’s torch
The freight BR Standard Class 9F steamer tender engine locomotives went out to carry the different heavy freight goods train loads to their destinations.
One of my favourite videos from this channel. But is it me or is the audio very slow? This could just be me but it seems very slow compared to other videos
The Franco Crosti idea was great on locos that were poor performers to begin with. But the 9F's were great performers from the outset so it's no wonder that the Franco Crosti idea showed no improvement in their fuel economy. Even the Giesel ejector fitted example 92250 showed no improvement although the idea was to fire the loco with substandard coal getting the same performance as a loco fired with good quality coal. The Giesel ejector made a loco more powerful with good quality coal as they found on the southern region when BoB Fighter Command was fitted with a Giesel ejector making her as powerful as a Merchant Navy but no more were fitted to other Bullied locos due to the phasing out of steam. 34092 WC City of Wells has a Giesel ejector fitted in preservation although working on a line with a maximum speed limit of 25mph doesn't allow it to show it's full potential although it did have a mainline ticket in previous years. With the benefit of hindsight the 9F's were a waste of taxpayers money being built to last well into the 1980's and maybe 1990's. Wasteful decisions were made like doing a heavy general overhaul on locos which were then sent to the scrap yard when the overhaul was completed. When David Shepard bought 92203 he had a look at when 9F's had been given a heavy general overhaul and 92203 was one such loco but now destined to be scrapped so he bought it for a pittance as it was now only worth scrap value money. 92220 was built to be preserved as it only had a working life of five years until it's withdrawal. All 9F's allocated to the S&D were double chimney engines and if a single chimney 9F loco worked on the S&D then it was a borrowed loco. 92245 has been "preserved" and is an ex double chimney S&D 9F.
The most scary thing about all this is not how late the British still used steam power, but that the films from then are actually in color. It was that late.
It's a wonder that no UK railways ever bothered with mechanical stokers and very large fireboxes supported by 4 wheel trailing trucks. I guess it's because most of the freight cars didn't have air/vacuum brakes and the buffer-and-chain couplings were pretty weak compared to the AAR knuckle couplers (and the other similar ones in use throughout continental Europe) so there wasn't much point given the limited weight of trains. Also - feedwater heaters were standard equipment here in the US, so it's baffling to me that they weren't a thing in the UK much.
A recent tv programme has indicated that there is an alternative to coal thats made fron vegitaton that works as efficiently as coal so that steam trains can continue to run
It wasn't any good. One 9F 2-10-0 finished its days in 1967/8 running as a 2-8-2 after breaking a rear coupling rod and having the opposite side rod removed, just to keep it in service. It was reportedly quite a poor tool, which would be expected after losing a fifth of its adhesive weight. Of course that is not a true comparison with a purpose-built 2-8-2, but the lower axle-loading of a ten-coupled engine would always be an advantage. And end-coupled engines have less tendency to wheel-slip than those with carrying axles under the cab.
92134 is a north yorkshire moors resident had the privilege to be hauled by that mighty beast witch led to me liking her have seen her at grosmont shove her train in a tad further with little effort was a 9f in scrap state on wensleydale railway but its gone elsewhere think its on the railway were 60103 flying scotsman had a bit of a rough shunt
There should have been,another alternative,that would have changed the BR mindset! The Santa Fe had 2-10-0 engines in pusher service on Raton Pass,and other grades,but found that,if they put a trailing truck on the engine,it could go up and down the grades,much more rapidly,so the 2-10-2 was invented! Now,if BR had followed that logic,and had 2-8-2's,and 2-10-2's,equipped with stokers,and feed water heaters[Worthington,or equivalent],ala the ATSF,mayhaps there would been a different outcome! The Mikes would have been in road service,and have operated,as general purpose units! See the 141R's on the SNCF,and many US engines,that doubled in brass! However,it seems,British engineers had an aversion to trailing trucks,despite the colonial railways,such as India,using large amounts of them! They never learned from others triumphs,why?? Thank you for your attention! Thank you 😇 😊!
Can anyone confirm my memory of such a locomotive hauling a coal train on the Waterloo Chessington South branch line I guess to what was the then Charringtons coal yard at Chessington South.This was actually after 1968.
The grreat days of loco i can rember the big four before the take over i would watch lots of mixe traffic trundleing along the network miss the old days off goods open wagons parcels all together and break wagons on the back from the big four sadly in now my later years i miss it its all container wagons now sometimes you wouldn't get a mix of the big four
A preheater is not a boiler, it's called an economiser. I get the feeling you watched the "train of thought" video on this as he made the exact same mistake.
A really good introduction to one of my favourite locomotive classes. I've written a song about the 9F. If there's interest, I may get around to recording it properly. Mobycam preview here: ua-cam.com/video/dMmTWmGyqGY/v-deo.html
Shame the 9F (and other flangeless driving wheeled locomotives) have been banned from the mainline, would definitely be a sight seeing a 9F doing 75 with 10-on
It's puzzling in a naive way , why water was boiled off to atmosphere, rather than being condensed for reuse. Because out that chimney was going....energy...a pre- heated water being replaced by new unheated water...that's a LOT of energy...gone...
Yes, but it is not totally lost. Some of this steam is used to draw the fire, drive the injectors and heat the train. Condensing equipment adds to weight and complexity.
The size of the heat rejection apparatus to allow condensation of steam back to water would be huge.... There is always a loss... the balance between perfection and "that'll be good enough, mate".... Nuclear and coal fired power plants have the same problem.... Fukushima was near the coast so it could cool down the steam using seawater....and seawater drowned it during the tsunami... Many British coal fired power plants used those hideously large concrete cooling chimneys.... otherwise using river water for cooling and then discharging it back to a nearby river would have boiled the water in the river....
@@physiocrat7143Agreed, but the additional complexity isn't /that/ much. (To my knowledge, using condensers was the rule on steam ships.) However, the weight may well have been, as air had to be used for the cooling.
@@chrislaarman7532 Some locomotives were fitted with condensing apparatus eg for use on the London Underground but the cooling tanks quickly overheated. Also in South Africa.
@@physiocrat7143 London Underground: yes, it takes quite some air to condense steam... Besides, I pity the crew spending their hours on steam engines in tunnels. Soot in your eyes, soot in your lungs... South Africa: yes, little choice in desert areas. In general: so much energy contained in the coal (or oil) burned gets lost. It does make sense to put every bit of it to use. So, engineers have thought up quite some tricks for different stages of its use. I have learned some when I was to become a ship engineer. André Chapelon wrote a thorough book on steam locomotives. Currently, Swiss manufacturer DLM may constitute the centre of excellence, with former German steam locomotive 52 8055 and others.
I always found it hilarious that the best ever heavy freight locomotive turned out, quite unintentionally, to be capable of running at 90mph.
A lot of the "fast freight" intended steam locos turned out to be actually quite capable of high speed. Here in the US there are a few 2-8-4 types that have been known to regularly run above 70mph (consider that track limit in most places is 79mph)... Admittedly, the NKP S-2s do have 69" drivers vs the 9F's 60".
Imagine what those five foot drivers looked like that speed 🤣
@@adamc1272 8.5 reveloutions a second at 90mph
The German equivalents ( BR50 class) were considerably older than the 9F’s and lasted on DB till the end of steam in West Germany. I believe in the old East Germany they lasted longer on the DR.
Because it can handle the weight of the coaches better than most A4 Pacifics.
I started on the footplate with BR in 1980 and fired a few mainline steam excursions. Proud to say I fired 92220 Evening Star on the mainline in 1986 on the EMI Express, a charter by EMI Records along with Green Arrow. Diesel hauled from wherever to Edinburgh then steam hauled Edinburgh to Gleneagles, EMI had basically taken over Gleneagles Hotel for the weekend. ECS run up to Perth then returned light locos to Edinburgh.
Turning the locos on the dilapidated manual turntable in Perth yard was something else though, all they'd done was throw some oil on the pivots! Brilliant day apart from somebody nicking the lamps off the Evening Star when we stabled the locos in the bay platform at Perth station and had a break in the messroom.
That's.. amazing. :D 👏
The 9F are like one of the most powerful steam locomotives in Britain, and they looked pretty impressive.
The p2 and p1 are judging you from the grave
We have now reached peak 'like'
@@blehtbh- Learning what "one of" means will help you greatly here...
The U1 is judging you... 😜🤣
@@liamcollins6940- Weren't they classes 40 - 45..?? 🤔🤣🤣
@@BassandoForte nah I’d win
It's interesting that theoretically, the 9F's could have run well into the 1990's. I wonder how they would have looked in British Rail liveries with the Double Arrow logo on them.
If they retained overall black, and made the white double arrow as large as would fit on the smoke deflectors, I think that would be quite striking.
Yes. There were a few rail men who thought keeping steam locos longer and electrification of most of the network would have been a better modernisation plan. Evening Star was a loco that served not many years. As did others. Sad really. Especially when lots of the early diesels didn't last long. 😢
Stainless steel boiler cladding and smoke deflectors; tender and cabside in BR blue which large double arrow on the tender.
92134 is currently resident at the North York Moors Railway and is a great fit there, pulling long trains over hilly terrain with ease.
There's a great video here on UA-cam from a recent steam gala showing it rescuing a failed train. It started 6 coaches full to standing, plus a failed Standard tank, uphill, and walked away like there was nothing on the drawbar. Amazing things.
Was on this 2 months ago!
@@randomsimpsonsquotes6033 I was on the train that broke down last Autumn as it happens. Quite the adventure!
@@cooperised yeah I've seen the videos of it being towed.
Very much so.
That's sheer power being put to good use. 🙂👍
Nice to know so many escaped the scrap heap. Beautiful piece of BR engineering. 🤧
Went to somewhere called Potters Bar and watching these on a straight piece of track (as I remember it) on freight trains/coal trains is something I will never forget. Strong impressive & good looking. Obviously killed off way before they should’ve been.
I spent many a time in the 1960s watching the Annesley 'runner' coal trains on the GC main line. The 9Fs regularly ran at 50mph on the return empty workings from Woodford. 50 unfitted loose coupled wagons at that speed was something to behold.
The re-vamp gave me the excuse to watch this excellent film once again.
Very interesting. So the class 9F had a similar role like the German BR 50 (BR: Baureihe; serie) which had the same wheel configuration 2-10-0 . In West Germany (FRG) steam traction operation ended in 1977. In East Germany (GDR) those machines could have been used even in the 1980ies.
The 9f is a considerably newer and larger engine tho
@@the_retag the class 50 is slightly bigger
9f=66 feet length
50=75 feet length
both seem to weigh the same
9f =1118Kw/1500hp, class 50=1200Kw/1600hp
there were still some steam workings in East Germany after unification, even around Berlin as late as 1993. There was an article in one of the mags recently where a famous German tour operator was celebrating his birthday using a loco that was a sister loco of his favourite from the 90s in Berlin and it stated the last workings in service were 93/94. there was also a piece a few years ago about Col Steve Davies, who became head of the NRM, talking about his memories of a Berlin steam shed in 91/2/3 whilst he was a young officer posted to Berlin after reunification. To be fair the east only stopped using steam on top link expresses such as Berlin-Dresden in 1982
The P2 used water preheating. Interesting. Too complicated for the two examples under construction I assume.
@@andrewyoung749 after German Reunification I can hardly imagine regular operation of steam locomotives to be continued - at least not by DR, even less by DB. There was some operation on some narrow track lines and for enthousiasts and tourists.
The East German government wanted to end steam traction around 1980. However efforts of electrification of railway lines was lagging behind schedule, and then, after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, oil prices started rising which, after some time, caused the GDR to reactivate some of their steam locomotives since prices for coal were remaining stable. It was an early indicator of their economy and that of the entire COMECON wasn't doing great. Due to their invasion in Afghanistan the USSR couldn't offer oil at a cheaper price, nor did Romania.
It's great to learn that Dr. Costi and André Chapelon have been involved (at some stage) in the development of the Class 9F.
It strikes me that in the UK such a class eventually came into development by BR, whereas it wasn't included in the development scheme of the Deutsche Bundesbahn (the West-German precursor of Deutsche Bahn). Nevertheless, the last official steam deployment schemes of DB (1977) involved heavy 2-10-0 engines, and those of DR (1988) in East-Germany lighter 2-10-0s. I admit: those pre-war designs had been equipped with new boilers (including some using the Franco-Costi design).
Here in the Netherlands, Riddles' Austerity engines may have been the only 2-10-0s NS has ever had (not counting a few damaged German ones), and the last of these was withdrawn as early as 1952!
The 9F had considerably more power than almost all other freight engines in the UK preceding them, tractive effort being the same as the slightly larger German 2-10-0 Br50 but in horsepower as powerful as the German Heavy 2-10-0 Br44 which had three cylinders.
Certainly one of the best Standard designs, on a shared first place with the Standard 2-6-4 4MT tanks in my opinion, as the 4MT tanks were very versatile and reliable locomotives too.
Just a shame of the Franco Crosti experiment which was wasted effort as the exhaust steam injectors and double chimneys combined with optimised steam channels by Andre Chapelon made them already very efficient without the added complexity. Not mentioned but a big problem on the Franco Crosti system was the corrosion in the feedwater heater boiler, exhaust gasses cooled down far enough in these to have forming of sulphuric acid occurring eating away the boiler tubes.
One was modified to improve coaling and used as the Lickey Banker. Great video.
For a country that once had a globe spanning empire, the incredible short-sited nature of successive post-war governments is truly astounding, and has been illustrated many times on this channel through the various downfalls of British transport and industry.
From the mid 1950s a lot of things in Britain became fashion driven. Steam had to go because it was seen as an old fashioned embarrassment, the same applied to Victorian housing stock.
It puts a new light on the vilification of diesels in the works of the Reverend Awdry: he was basically saying that not only were diesels as a technology not all they were cracked up to be, but that the way they went about transitioning was half baked. Look at how little quality control they had
My favorite BR steam locomotive. The 9F was the pinnacle of British steam engineering.
Mine as well
:)
When I was a "passed man" at Salisbury back in the '70's, I remember being upgraded for a driving turn. It was to ride on a steam loco. that wasn't even in steam but being towed back home to Cranmore after major boiler work. No problems there though, it turned out that
the owner of the loco. was also riding on the footplate. Thats right David Shepherd, and what a pleasant down to earth bloke he was.
Certainly that was one of my most memorable days on the railway.
It such a real & tragedy shame that these incredible giants of steam have to go to ‘you know where’ to be cut up as it would be nice to these locos in action right until the 1990s. The 9F are by far my only favourite largest BR Standard design locomotive and I support the group at Bluebell of the overhaul of 92240.
The blame lies with the cost of operating steam locomotives compared to diesel and electric locomotives coupled with the needs of the Clean Air Act of 1956.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 partly and in general yes. but i think it was a 'we want to be modern thing'. never discount how that plays in peoples minds. 'look at us, invest here, we are going forward'.
obviously a lot of money could have been saved with diesel. but given the unions forced the maintenance of 2 man crews on diesels anyway that saving was delayed for decades.
ultimately it probably cost loads compared to keeping steam for another decade and transitioning straight to electric.
@andrewyoung749 Well, as the Treasury was the only body funding the railways, the idea of modernising bring in investment doesn't fly. Modernising to save money would have been the only reason tge Treasury would have accepted. The Modernisation Plan called for a gradual replacement of steam traction. But for the Clean Air Act 1956, which made BR liable for a fine for each steam locomotive making excessive smoke, BR would have removed steam locomotives more gradually replacing them with thoroughly tested diesel and electric locomotives.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 the point of 'we are modern invest here' isn't so much specific to the railway as leveraging a modern image railway for general purposes of attracting inward investment. countries tend to hop on trends to show they are players, at the cutting edge and that people should put their money there. take brutalist architecture. Its clearly terrible. but all around the west a trademark way to show you were with the times was to tear down old stuff and replace it with concrete blocks. even south africa when isolated re apartheid was tearing down colonial stations and putting up rubbish brutalist ones to show 'we are here, we are in the game, we are with the times'.
these days its glass and steel. countries follow silly trends.
yes saving money is a good reason but did we actually save overall. as i said we had to keep 2 man crews anyway and a huge amount of money went up he wall on diesels.
@@neiloflongbeck5705
*TAX.* Over 40% of gross labour costs to employers consist of tax. This adversely affects all labour intensive activities, particularly transport, retailing and health care. In the public sector, it is simply a case of money in/money out.
Thank you once again for a most informative and entertaining steam video.- The amazing 9F's ;)
It was a 9F that pulled me from Templecoombe to Bournemouth on my last trip over a part of the Somerset and Dorset. After that, I could only walk my dog (a collie cross, Brunel) up the empty formation from Blandford.
I was standing on the platform at Bournemouth West. A Saturday treat to hang around on cold draughty platforms waiting for S+DJR oddities. Two bob 8x10 prints of locos in the foyer as were often models of locos built by engineers from 4" to 15" guage. Site now occupied by Wessex Way which terminates one mile on at County Gates. Liberals controlling Poole in 1969 refused extending WsxWy to Alderney, Poole thus linking with the A35 to Dorchester. Traffic in the town has been a mess ever since. Politicians scoring points, eh?
9F the only train my ultimate garage needs.
Check out the American biggies...your ultimate garage is " upsized" 😮
Outrageously detailed description!
What never ceases to astound me is the insular attitude of British Rail Designers...after WWII, was any of the German Kreigslok designs ( BR52 etc ) of 2-10-0 wheel arrangement, some of which continued running in Eastern Europe until the 2000s.
Whilst there may have been some Loading Gauge issues ( Europe vs UK) but these could be overcome.
The centre flangeless wheel won’t negotiate today’s check rails, hence the ban.
The truly baffling part to me is that the designers didn't think to ask steam holdouts across the pond what made their locos better. Looking at something like a later era Nickel Plate 2-8-4 (mid to late 1940s, the "last hurrah" of steam in the US) I can't quite understand why by the time the 9Fs were drawn up a decade later otherwise standard appliances like feedwater heaters or roller bearings weren't included by default.
@@davidfuller581 Expense. The government were paying for them so they were built to the bone. Simple but effective.
Fascinating as always, thank you.
Some very nice panning in the camera work! BR could pull them out when they needed them :)
A most interesting account, well done.
In 1960 , BRs coal consumption was 90,200,000 tons. (Edit. Sorry 9 million not ninety)So they moved all that and the coal for power stations, export, steelworks, concrete works and domestic use. In one year.
Not certain about that, total UK production for 1960 was 198 million tonnes (195M Imp Tons) I can't see a figure for our considerable exports but you are saying BR consumed just under half of everything produced. That includes exports, power generation, steel manufacture, gas manufacture (pre natural gas) concrete production, industry and domestic. That can't be right.
@@COIcultist just rechecked my source material in sep61 trains illustrated. Err, nine million tons. Not ninety. Red faces all round!! Still a bloody lot mind!
@@highdownmartin First of all Sir, thanks for replying and coughing to an error. It's a one decimal place error, and that has been done by more people and more times than I could ever guess. It's nice when people are sensible and honest with YT comments. I've had complex discussions with people that were brilliant, yet seen flame wars start from next to nothing.
My advantage was having worked for the NCB and British Coal and produced figures on coal sales and also sold coal, the figures had a meaning beyond numbers to me.
It shouldn't be underestimated what 9 million tonnes is. It is about 1.5 to 1.66 times the consumption of a 2GW coal-fired power station. Something like Fiddlers Ferry. In terms of production, it is 8 to 12 large modern collieries in the 1980s.
I can't write anything more, I've being trying to reference articles to check figures, but the figures are preposterous. There were 2 (or 3) 2million tonne per year mines in the UK. Just looked up Kellingly Colliery, which I thought was one. A local paper mixes up a theoretical ability to wind 900 Tonne per hour and later says it produced 400,000 Tonnes plus on its best day. Despite the fact that even 900T times by 24 only reaches 21,600T.
Nobody seems to understand, though emptied as one complete train, most MGR trains were split within the collieries for loading.
@@COIcultist great reply, volume production on this scale is fascinating, especially as the heritage movement uses about 60 thousand tons per year. Thanks.
A fine loco, easy running and free steaming. Fired many of them from Newton Heath to Yorkshire. After being bounced all over the place on the ubiquitous Austerities they were marvellous.
9F's.......Spaceships......bring back an old memory. I was on the disused station at Shirebrook West as a lad. A 9F loaded with coal wagons out of Shirebrook Colliery had pulled up with the semaphore signal, mounted on the road bridge, against her. My grandfather was driving her!
'Aye up grandad'
'Aye up lad. What yer doin' here on the station?'
'Oh just playing grandad. What does that handle do grandad, what is that glass thing for etc etc.' All explained.
'You know what grandad.'
'What lad.'
'It must be great to be a steam locomotive engine driver.'
At this point the fireman leaning on his shovel responded.
'Aye lad, but first yer have to learn how to shovel three ton of this' pointing at the tender coal with the shovel, 'into this', opening the firebox doors with a mighty roar, 'while it's movin'"
'I still reckon that it must be great to be a steam locomotive engine driver.'
The fireman looked at my grandad and said, 'What yer reckon Bill?'
Grandad replied, 'I reckon a chip off the old block.' They both chuckled.
At that point the semaphore signal changed to clear.
The fireman at that point got hold of the side rails and leaned out. Looking me straight in the eyes he said, 'It won't be long before you're on the footplate sonny.'
'See yer grandad.'
'See yer later lad.'
'See yer mister.'
'See yer sonny.'
They gave a whistle, and started off. I remember this like it was yesterday. The smell of the smoke, steam, and oil was wonderful. It is one of those memories that you never forget.
William Stroudley promoted feedwater heating on the LBSCR long before Marsh came along!
6:20 *I well remember watching the Crosti's near Linwood School (Leicester) in 1955 !*
I'm imagining an alternate timeline where the 73 oil crisis hits earlier and these things are brought back to last into the early 80's, or where they were sold to a backwater 3rd world country that had coal reserves and a need for motive power not falling apart.
Or if the Soviets failed in East Asia and chose to dig in to the middle east and east Africa.
An excellent resume of an excellent loco. I have no idea why a decision was made to abruptly end all steam traction in 1968 rather than gradually phase out the freight haulage side. Passenger work was a different matter. Surely the cost of building replacement diesels of a power sufficient to match the 9Fs TE would have been more than keeping 9Fs on for heavy freight duties for say, the next 10 years even taking into account the maintenance costs of a steam loco as opposed to a diesel. I imagine also that the 9Fs were much less prone to failure than the diesels, being much simpler and easier to repair. One inconsequential point is that Evening Star hauled the last Pines Express over the Somerset and Dorset - (and unassisted)- on 8th September 1962.
The accountants didn’t want to pay for the maintenance of the infrastructure to support steam as well as having to pay for the new diesel and electric maintenance.
As such made economic sense to move to diesel and electric as quick as possible.
Even before World War 2 then the big 4 were looking at diesel and or electric as was recognised as thee future.
After WW2 then most of continental infrastructure was gone and had to be built up so made more sense to go diesel and electric rather then spend money on steam infrastructure when was recognised as already outdated prior to WW2.
UK however mainly had the steam infrastructure in place, abundant supply of coal etc so sticking with steam short term made more sense.
However once decision made to go diesel and electric then you want to transition quickly.
@@michaelmcnally2331 And don't forget by the 1960s people increasingly didn't want to work in dirty unsafe environments. BR was finding it difficult to employ cleaners who would eventually go on to fire and then drive steam.
Enthusiasts forget Steam was not glamorous, to many that worked on the railways. It was dirty, tiring and dangerous. For every railwayman that loved steam there were many that welcomed the cleanliness, ease and comfort of the modern railway.
Let's be honest Steam was inefficient and less productive than the modern technology that replaced it.
People love steam but most didn't have to work with it!
@@mandywithell That's the truth!
Interesting summing up at the end of the video:
"... as a machine that is too large for most heritage railways... thus meaning that the operational future for the survivors is somewhat uncertain."
92134.... Now finished overhaul and in service at NYMR
92203... fundraising underway for the next overhaul at NNR
92212... late stages of overhaul at MHR
92214... only just out of traffic and GCR plan to do an overhaul
92240... beginning overhaul at Bluebell
Six out of nine have run in preservation... five out of nine have an active future in preservation. Even if the other three never run again, its an impressive percentage!!!!
You remade your 9f video, that's cool
Incidently East Germany kept Steam Locomotives in use, to reduce Oil-Dependency.
They actually reactivated them. According to their 5-year-plan steam train operation was supposed to end around 1980.
I remember well when all of a sudden "Eisenbahn Magazin" reported that the GDR was starting to reactivate several types of steam locomotives due to rising oil prices. At least that caused a little wave of tourism in the GDR.
Thank goodness for that. Tornado’s boiler had to be manufactured at Meiningen as thankfully it still had the facility to do so. The boiler and spare for the 2-8-2 Mikado, currently under construction, were also fabricated there.
@@uselesseater1584 The repair and maintainance works in Meiningen is a really remarkable business and a quite unique one in Europe.
Very well explained. Imagine different versions of this class that BR didn't do, ok, what about a three-cylinder 9F, 71000 type valve gear( i can't spell it), a 2-8-2 or a tank version, a well tank design or side tank 2-10-2 or 4T?
I've always regarded these as my favourite steam locos, then I discovered on a visit to the NRM in the 1980s that I was outshopped on the same day as Evening Star. More recently I've had several great days out behind 92212 on the Mid Hants Line.
Standing at the bottom of a field off Bryant Road, Kettering (now a housing estate) in the late fifties I watched a coal train with three 9F's, one at the front, one in the middle and one at the rear, go by using whistle codes between them. I thought the train would never end
A few years later whilst in the Harpenden Junction signal box I would watch from behind the lever frame these locos and also 8F's taking coal trains to London and returning with clanking empties.
Today there are 9 9Fs that are still here as of today
Great footage
13:46 Train spotters at the end of the platform!
I can’t imagine today’s children deriving the pleasure that a penny platform ticket gave.
Who wants to collect countless vanilla 390 and 220 numbers.
Another fascinating video - had never heard of the Austerity 2-10-0. SR Leader aside, I often wonder what the next generation of British steam locos would have looked like if the move to diesel was delayed - are there any drawings/images of potential designs that never got off the drawing board?
Thanks that was an excellent video 👍
Its such a shame the 9fs aren't permitted to run on the mainline network anymore.
I wonder if they would be permitted to run on mainlines here on the Continent. (Not our favourite suggestion, I assume.) After all, we have Riddle's 73755 on static display at the Spoorwegmuseum (Dutch national railway museum, at Utrecht).
Technical reasons - modern trackwork is unsuitable and derailments would be too frequent causing disruption. I'm sure even "The Powers That Be" would love to see it happen, but unfortunately it never is.
@@simaesthesia Is modern trackwork that different to when they were used on all mainlines?
@@jcmgt Higher check rails I am led to believe which might foul the flangeless centre wheels!
I seem to remember, from news of than ban at the time, the reason they cannot be used on the main line is due to the check-rails which would be fowled by the centre (flangeless) driving wheels due to the 5 sets in a rigid line.
What are the differences? Also not gonna lie, the microphone on the original is better
he cut about 20 minutes of content out
@@Pyt3xWdym lol, he extended the runtime
The original original video was more than 40 minutes long.
@Pyt3x I think you're on about the A4 video, the original 9F video was only 13 minutes
@@srgntsylveon2919 No, the original original video went over every depo the 9Fs were based out of.
When was the video 1st released as 92134 has run on the NYMR for about 5yrs.
Interesting video, thanks.
Dieselation was rushed and botched. Instead of steam ending in 1968, it should have been 1978, to give the 9Fs a reasonable working life.
Agreed, particularly in view of the unions refusing to lose the firemen until they retired. The net savings from bringing forward the end of steam can't have been that great, because they had to build diesel locos much faster than they would have done had they allowed the newer steam designs (like the 9Fs) to work out their designed service lives. It would be interesting to run a comparison of these two economic scenarios.
I once heard BR originally wanted to keep steam until 1990s.
@@terrier_productionswhich they probably should have done, or at least till the 80s
@@CC-Cobalt-1043 even though this is somwhat un-related to how long steam should have lasted, I realised a few years ago that if Beeching never swung his axe, there’s a good chance heritage railways would have never existed and thus a lot more locomotives & rolling stock would have fell victim the Cutter’s torch
The freight BR Standard Class 9F steamer tender engine locomotives went out to carry the different heavy freight goods train loads to their destinations.
One of my favourite videos from this channel. But is it me or is the audio very slow? This could just be me but it seems very slow compared to other videos
It's unfortunately a robot voice..artificial reading of English.....
@@JohnSmith-pl2bk -erm its not a robot. Thats just his accent and voice au naturel.
These are basically the steam-powered version of the the Class 58, 60 & 66 diesels combined.
Strange to think that these magnificent locomotives could have been running into the 1990's.
Would like to see you cover the Class 08 shunters at some point.
Could you do a video about the Halesowen branch in south Birmingham please.
92085 was the penultimate loco cut up by Woodhams in 1980, followed by a GW tank.
The Franco Crosti idea was great on locos that were poor performers to begin with. But the 9F's were great performers from the outset so it's no wonder that the Franco Crosti idea showed no improvement in their fuel economy. Even the Giesel ejector fitted example 92250 showed no improvement although the idea was to fire the loco with substandard coal getting the same performance as a loco fired with good quality coal. The Giesel ejector made a loco more powerful with good quality coal as they found on the southern region when BoB Fighter Command was fitted with a Giesel ejector making her as powerful as a Merchant Navy but no more were fitted to other Bullied locos due to the phasing out of steam. 34092 WC City of Wells has a Giesel ejector fitted in preservation although working on a line with a maximum speed limit of 25mph doesn't allow it to show it's full potential although it did have a mainline ticket in previous years.
With the benefit of hindsight the 9F's were a waste of taxpayers money being built to last well into the 1980's and maybe 1990's. Wasteful decisions were made like doing a heavy general overhaul on locos which were then sent to the scrap yard when the overhaul was completed. When David Shepard bought 92203 he had a look at when 9F's had been given a heavy general overhaul and 92203 was one such loco but now destined to be scrapped so he bought it for a pittance as it was now only worth scrap value money. 92220 was built to be preserved as it only had a working life of five years until it's withdrawal. All 9F's allocated to the S&D were double chimney engines and if a single chimney 9F loco worked on the S&D then it was a borrowed loco. 92245 has been "preserved" and is an ex double chimney S&D 9F.
As of today, I think only 92134 is still steaming, with 92214 and prince being in for overhaul and evening star being stuffed and displayed at york
19:28 I would not limit that statement only to the UK railway network. Those were certainly the best locomotives of its kind on the world.
18:59 Dont you mean 92207 Morning Star?
The most scary thing about all this is not how late the British still used steam power, but that the films from then are actually in color. It was that late.
It's a wonder that no UK railways ever bothered with mechanical stokers and very large fireboxes supported by 4 wheel trailing trucks. I guess it's because most of the freight cars didn't have air/vacuum brakes and the buffer-and-chain couplings were pretty weak compared to the AAR knuckle couplers (and the other similar ones in use throughout continental Europe) so there wasn't much point given the limited weight of trains. Also - feedwater heaters were standard equipment here in the US, so it's baffling to me that they weren't a thing in the UK much.
fitting mechanical stokers was looked at for the Duchesses but decided against. on test runs/record attempts I think they had 2 men firing
i fired these when at
saltley they were great the fire
Bros making me work on my playlist
Nice video.
A recent tv programme has indicated that there is an alternative to coal thats made fron vegitaton that works as efficiently as coal so that steam trains can continue to run
As usual the very best examples of a transport technology are at the end of its life. Much like the ICE cars of today before electric cars!
I still think that should have built at least 1, class 9, 2-8-2 just to see if it was any good!
It wasn't any good. One 9F 2-10-0 finished its days in 1967/8 running as a 2-8-2 after breaking a rear coupling rod and having the opposite side rod removed, just to keep it in service. It was reportedly quite a poor tool, which would be expected after losing a fifth of its adhesive weight. Of course that is not a true comparison with a purpose-built 2-8-2, but the lower axle-loading of a ten-coupled engine would always be an advantage. And end-coupled engines have less tendency to wheel-slip than those with carrying axles under the cab.
You should do the class A2 and Blue Peter next
Fascinating great history
You might find the NSWGR 38 class locomotive an interesting story
92134 is a north yorkshire moors resident had the privilege to be hauled by that mighty beast witch led to me liking her have seen her at grosmont shove her train in a tad further with little effort was a 9f in scrap state on wensleydale railway but its gone elsewhere think its on the railway were 60103 flying scotsman had a bit of a rough shunt
If I were the designer of a freight engine, I'd make it a 2-10-2, i don't know how rocky riding in a 9f's cab would be
It must be interesting to design engineer and construct an antique
There should have been,another alternative,that would have changed the BR mindset! The Santa Fe had 2-10-0 engines in pusher service on Raton Pass,and other grades,but found that,if they put a trailing truck on the engine,it could go up and down the grades,much more rapidly,so the 2-10-2 was invented! Now,if BR had followed that logic,and had 2-8-2's,and 2-10-2's,equipped with stokers,and feed water heaters[Worthington,or equivalent],ala the ATSF,mayhaps there would been a different outcome! The Mikes would have been in road service,and have operated,as general purpose units! See the 141R's on the SNCF,and many US engines,that doubled in brass! However,it seems,British engineers had an aversion to trailing trucks,despite the colonial railways,such as India,using large amounts of them! They never learned from others triumphs,why?? Thank you for your attention! Thank you 😇 😊!
Can anyone confirm my memory of such a locomotive hauling a coal train on the Waterloo Chessington South branch line I guess to what was the then Charringtons coal yard at Chessington South.This was actually after 1968.
The grreat days of loco i can rember the big four before the take over i would watch lots of mixe traffic trundleing along the network miss the old days off goods open wagons parcels all together and break wagons on the back from the big four sadly in now my later years i miss it its all container wagons now sometimes you wouldn't get a mix of the big four
A preheater is not a boiler, it's called an economiser.
I get the feeling you watched the "train of thought" video on this as he made the exact same mistake.
Nine of the 9Fs are preserved
Reworked and yet the details on 92134 isn’t up to date 😂😂
Ive heard mixed things about the 9F. Personally I love it but Ive heard that the S160 was more powerful.
Ones being repaired at the bluebell railway
The US plans to answer China's hi-speed train challenge with a system of hi-speed buses...
A really good introduction to one of my favourite locomotive classes. I've written a song about the 9F. If there's interest, I may get around to recording it properly. Mobycam preview here: ua-cam.com/video/dMmTWmGyqGY/v-deo.html
I like trains!
Long live Steam traction power.
Murdoch The Mighty Engine
10.30 Initial negotiations being carried out in French, the native language of neither participant....you couldn`t make it up.
For you Thomas fans, this is Murdoch’s basis.
Damn, rip Murdoch.
Out of the assembly line straight into the melting pot. 😢
they should of stopped making new kettles in the 50s. .. or when they started the modisation plan
Shame the 9F (and other flangeless driving wheeled locomotives) have been banned from the mainline, would definitely be a sight seeing a 9F doing 75 with 10-on
Capable of pulling two thousand tons!
Murdoch from Thomas IRL
Electric locomotives powered by coal fired power stations would been more efficient. And been in service longer.
Is it just me, or does he sound slurred in the video?
It's unfortunately a robot voice..artificial reading of English.....
no it isn't a robot - I should know - I'm his mother!!
@@jam5076
OK.
Just some inflections especially to the ends of words mimic pure "robot" AI voice modus operandi....
It's puzzling in a naive way , why water was boiled off to atmosphere, rather than being condensed for reuse. Because out that chimney was going....energy...a pre- heated water being replaced by new unheated water...that's a LOT of energy...gone...
Yes, but it is not totally lost. Some of this steam is used to draw the fire, drive the injectors and heat the train.
Condensing equipment adds to weight and complexity.
The size of the heat rejection apparatus to allow condensation of steam back to water would be huge....
There is always a loss...
the balance between perfection and "that'll be good enough, mate"....
Nuclear and coal fired power plants have the same problem....
Fukushima was near the coast so it could cool down the steam using seawater....and seawater drowned it during the tsunami...
Many British coal fired power plants used those hideously large concrete cooling chimneys....
otherwise using river water for cooling and then discharging it back to a nearby river would have boiled the water in the river....
@@physiocrat7143Agreed, but the additional complexity isn't /that/ much. (To my knowledge, using condensers was the rule on steam ships.) However, the weight may well have been, as air had to be used for the cooling.
@@chrislaarman7532
Some locomotives were fitted with condensing apparatus eg for use on the London Underground but the cooling tanks quickly overheated.
Also in South Africa.
@@physiocrat7143 London Underground: yes, it takes quite some air to condense steam... Besides, I pity the crew spending their hours on steam engines in tunnels. Soot in your eyes, soot in your lungs...
South Africa: yes, little choice in desert areas.
In general: so much energy contained in the coal (or oil) burned gets lost. It does make sense to put every bit of it to use. So, engineers have thought up quite some tricks for different stages of its use. I have learned some when I was to become a ship engineer. André Chapelon wrote a thorough book on steam locomotives. Currently, Swiss manufacturer DLM may constitute the centre of excellence, with former German steam locomotive 52 8055 and others.
Franco-Crosti.
They should have run till the 1980s. What a waste.
You can tell that Britain is an island. They just blow their stench across the ocean to Scandinavia. No worries.
❤🌈🤔 amazing bitter British engineering I do love steam. very efficient stored energy bit like a battery 🖐️😁 🔋 #buzzofftoxic #TIEDAMEW #bigbuzztv
Nothing efficient about steam locomotives.