The Bristol Railway Archive

I have just been revisiting the potted histories in 'Barry Scrapyard' by Alan Warren, and notice that small Prairie No 4588 was transferred from Truro to Oswestry in January 1959 and then in March 1959 was moved to Penzance.

How would the transfer have been effected? They clearly did not cart locos around on low-loaders so it seems that there are several possibilities: [a] Light engine movement; Employed on timetabled services to get from A to B; [c] In the consist of a freight movement; [d] Towed as a single item by another loco.

Does anyone know? The thought of those poor little 4'7.1/2" wheels whizzing round for close on 300 miles is somewhat worrying. And why was it sent back so soon? Bad planning if you ask me.

There are a few things to take into account here:

1) Locomotives were often transferred following Works visits. If, for sake of argument, when it went in for a major overhaul 4588 was really needed at Truro and needed a replacement to be provided, then something "ex-works" would probably be sent (or a replacement sourced from somewhere else), and 4588 would then have been sent where it was needed when it came out of the works.

2) Western region allocation records were (there's a technical term for it ...) crap. Just because 4588 is shown as being transferred to Oswestry does not by any means mean that it actually got there This went on well into the 70s, and the first allocations of HSTs to the WR went unrecorded. I am of course not saying that it wasn't transferred to 89A, but just because somebody has read a book or an engine record card that says it went there, that is no guarantee in itself that it did. Show me a photograph of it up there and then I'll believe it unquestioningly

The method of moving these things varied. Whilst I don't know about 4588, I remember the railway press back in the 60s explaining how 51218 was moved from 82E to Swansea Duffryn Yard after Barrow Road decided they didn't need to keep it as spare any more just in case the class 03 shunter failed (because there was nothing else that was allowed into Avonside if it did!). It went light engine, was stopped on the way for at least one hot box at Horton Road (those wheels were probably not used to long-distance trips either!), and it took quite some time to get there!

Thanks, Robin. I knew that you could be relied upon to come up with a couple of sensible explanations. I certainly take your point about transfers being shown on paper, but not actually physically taking place.

I suppose the query still remains as to how smaller engines got from Truro, say, to the works at Swindon. I do know that running-in turns result in locos turning up in unexpected places. In 1952 we went from BTM to Swindon behind a sparkling 6925 Hackness Hall, with red name and number plates, which I discovered afterwards was an 84B Oxley engine.

i remember firing on a class14xx from bristol to hereford.
we were put into the loop at pilning to await a passage when i spoke the signalman he said we were to couple to a freight train coming to the rear of us when i told the driver he said we are not and got on to the signalman.we did not go through the tunnel coupled.it was in the appendix that a loco of 0-4-2 type was not to lead a 2-6-0 or a4-6-0 type it was the out come of years ago that an 0-6-0 saddle tank was pushed so hard it came off the road thats how rules and regs were brought into being.so off we went non stop to hereford.

It is true that the allocation history is central accounting records, and can be quite different from reality, especially when conformance to central budgets for locomotive costs needed to be controlled in an ingenious manner.

However, there were many moves round the system as well. One account I recall described a Plymouth to Paddington express with about 15 coaches stopped at Taunton and requesting a pilot for the climb from Castle Cary up to Brewham. A Hall was coming up behind light engine to Swindon works so all signalboxes were advised to "progress the light engine", unfortunately there was another light engine ahead on the line, a 1361 docks tank which was returning calmly from repair at Newton Abbot works to Bridgwater, and was sent ahead along the fast line, delaying the Hall of course, but the reaction of the express driver when his "pilot" finally pulled alongside at Taunton station can be well imagined !

I would feel that part of the reason why the GWR maintained the five works around the system, Swindon, Wolverhampton, Newton Abbot, Caerphilly and Oswestry, would be to avoid large numbers of the smaller locomotives having to be sent up the line to Swindon

Bill wrote:It is true that the allocation history is central accounting records, and can be quite different from reality, especially when conformance to central budgets for locomotive costs needed to be controlled in an ingenious manner.

These "accountany transfers" are one of the biggest problems when you are trying, as I have of course, to put together a locomotive allocation history.

There are examples beyond count of locomotives being "transferred" in the last month or so of their service. Transfers to 9G Gorton was a particular favourite of the accountants, but there were many others.

But of course, just because an engine was transferred in its last month of service and then withdrawn did not ncessarily mean that it was only a "paper transfer." As steam depots closed (and perhaps we could take 82B as an example), Barrow Road got virtually all of the Marsh's allocation at one fell swoop, with insufficient work for all of them to do, so it would only be natural for those in the best of condition to be kept running whilst the "rubbish" went straight to the scrap line. There would also have been many examples of locomotives being transferred, suffering a failure on the way or being "red carded" by the fitters when it arrived, so it too would have gone to "the dump."

Another example of transfers that may or may not physically have taken place was in the autumn of 1965, when a plan was devised to send a number of 84xxx tanks to the isle of Wight to replace the O2s. The idea was that they would go to Eastleigh Works to be modified to fit through Ryde tunnel, and ten of them (84010, 13-17, 19, 25, 26 and 28 ) were "transferred" to Eastleigh to have the work carried out. Then the decision to electrify the remaining IOW section was taken so the idea of modifying the 84xxx tanks was dropped. It is believed that only one of these engines actually got anywhere near Eastleigh, the remainder staying on the LMR, despite the records showing that they had been transferred.

After the plan was dropped, all but one (84025) were shown as being transferred to Stockport Edgeley and then withdrawn in the next month. 84025 was shown as being transferred back to Bolton (where it had been previously) and was also withdrawn the next month.

I presume that Eastleigh didn't have any spare budget to accommodate the depreciation charge on these engines, whilst Stockport Edgeley did!

Just a couple of examples of how trying to put a steam allocation database together is a bit like walking into a minefield

Robin wrote

It is believed that only one of these engines actually got anywhere near Eastleigh

I believe the engine concerned was 84014 seen here at Severn Tunnel Junction Shed on its way to Cashmores of Newport.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bristolsteam/6318093734/

It does seem to be coupled to a Southern tender.

trafalgar45682 wrote:

Robin Summerhill wrote:It is believed that only one of these engines actually got anywhere near Eastleigh

I believe the engine concerned was 84014 seen here at Severn Tunnel Junction Shed on its way to Cashmores of Newport.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bristolsteam/6318093734/

It does seem to be coupled to a Southern tender.

84014: -
Allocated to Bolton until November 1964
Transferred to Edgeley remaining there until October 1965
November 1965 - allocated to Eastleigh
December 1965 - reallocated back to Edgeley and withdrawn.

That's what the official records say. Anybody like to place a bet that it actually went back?