She was a handsome machine, indeed. The paintwork displayed in the color painting is stylish. Sorry to hear about Sox, as a former cat owner I know the same grief and you have my deepest sympathies.
Sturrock could design an handsome machine; I think it's also noteworthy that Patrick Stirling who designed the legendary GNR 8ft singles, was the works manager at R & W Hawthorns of Newcastle where No. 215 was built. The domeless boiler became a signature of Stirling. My partner and I are both heart-broken about Mrs Sox. She arrived as a tiny kitten in our back yard; some neighbours had got her to save their marriage but they broke up, moved out, and left her behind! Sox was absolutely determined she was going to live with us and got a forever home. Just not as long as we all hoped :(
Always good to see a review of a Sturrock locomotive! Sturrock was my great-great grandfather Probably the most comprehensive description of the story of 215 is available in Groves Locomotives of the GNR volume 1 pages 65-68. Sturrock's own views on 215 are recorded in my book 'Archibald Sturrock Pioneer Locomotive Engineer.' He was convinced it achieved what had been promised. However the expenditure on 215 was probably hard to justify. Groves notes its mileage for the period up to December 1864 was noticeably less than the large Hawthorn 2-2-2 singles which were used for the same services.
Condolences re Mrs Sox. Cats can be great companions. Aesthetically, 215 is probably one of my favourite engines, that I first came across in N Groves' "Great Northern Locomotive History: Volume One", while finding about the engines the Great Northern Railway lent to the Metropolitan Railway in 1863. The 'Little Sharpies' in early converted 0-4-2t form remain something of a mystery, in terms of their appearance. I wonder if some of the sketches sometimes referred to as based on 'official' drawings in that book are conjectural or the work of G F Bird. There's an interesting article in the Locomotive Magazine (1908, I think, don't have it to hand) about the 'Early Locomotive History of the Metropolitan Railway'.
Great video as always, Anthony. I'm really sorry about your cat, as a cat person myself I've gone through that situation more times than I'd like. You'll always have our support.
Thank you Martin. That means a lot. Sox was a rescue kitten; she turned up in the garden after having been left behind by her previous family who got her to save their marriage. They broke up, moved out, and left her behind. She was determined to live with us but was also very scared of men, especially tall men. So she got a happily ever after, even if the ever after wasn't as long as everyone had hoped the poor love.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory sometimes life plays you those nasty tricks, but at the end of the day, what matters is that you gave that sweet kitten the love she wouldn't have gotten otherwise. Don't be afraid to rescue another cat, that's the best kind of love you can give.
I knew nothing of this engine but I adore its lines already, got to love those open cabs and spec plates combined with the beautiful, yet almost alien frame design. Interesting to see this one has a compensating beam, which I tend to associate with North American 4-4-0s of the same vintage.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory I just had a look at a few of his other engines, you're absolutely right, nearly all of them have compensating bars between at least the front driving axles (which is to say an 0-4-2 tank and that bonkers 0-6-0+0-6-0 tender locomotive thing) I assume this was extra important on the bogie 4-2-2 to help with traction on that single driving wheel. It seems to be a feature that fell out of favor in Britain to some extent, was there a reason for that?
@@RockyRailroadProductions_B0SS It was to help with adhesion and track-holding. I think the general opinion in the UK that compensating levers/beams were too much trouble... the Great Northern didn't have the best permanent way in the world and compensating beams/levels/equalising beams (whatever you call them) helped prevent track damage through providing four points of suspension for a six-wheeler rather than three, spreading the load and help keep it on the track. Other lines like the LNWR with a far higher standard of p/way didn't use them.
Could you once maybe do a video on Engerth locomotives? They were a very popular design for a mountain locomotive for quite some time and the oldest preserved example is I 103 "Kladno", built in 1855, but i don't think the design is very well known nowadays.
Are there no depiction of the engine with the bogie arrangement? Unless I’m mistaken, all of the ones shown were with the fixed frame. Also, my condolences for your loss. Cats have so heartbreakingly short lives. :(
Actually, I believe all of the depictions here do show the lead bogie, it's just that it's designed in such a way that it blends almost flush with the frames. Certainly a visually deceptive and yet very pleasing approach.
All the images I used show No. 215 with a bogey. Finding depictions of No. 215 *without* the bogey are difficult as he only ran in that form for a few months and photography was in its infancy. There is a photo of her with a fixed frame but it's very grainy.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory OK, thanks for clarifying. That is a very snug fit indeed then, I guess the bogie frame slides/turns freely in the slot cut in the main frame.
Out of curiosity, have you heard of a locomotive with the name "John Stevens", It ran on the Camden & Amboy Railroad. Also, I love seeing your videos about early Locomotives with such detail, keep up the good work.
I have yes! I am currently working on a book on the Planet and Samson loco, and which includes a chapter on all the Stephenson locos exported to the US. It's a very complicated story but one which needs telling :-)
Another brilliant video there! Very interesting and thank you for posting. Talking of Sturrock, are you considering doing a video on the Sturrock Steam Tender locomotive? That would be amazing! I’m so sorry for your loss, your poor cat
Are there any drawings available of good detail of this engine? I'd be quite interested to see how the frame was modified and the early bogie design fitted in
Thankyou. I could have said a whole lot more, and demolished a load of myths which have grown up about her - especially the one that she was a failure and didn't run - but this is just a primer. At least she's getting better known! :)
Not sure if there’s anything notable about it, but I’ve always wanted to know more about the montparnasse derailment locomotive, (type 120 no 721). I’ve seen some of your videos on French locomotives which is what prompted me to ask! Relatively new subscriber but I’m very much enjoying the content so far. Keep up the great work! (Sorry to hear about your cat): )
Hi Jon - you're the second person to ask today :-) Yes I'm gong to look at the steam tender, and its antecendents. Not a new idea or universal to Mr Sturrock :-)
Was the bogie fitted a pivoted frame for the front wheels, which is not a bogie compared to the later Adams type where there was curved lateral play in the bogie wheels allowing a more tangential set to the rail curvature. Thankyou for the video, please keep doing videos on these early locos.
It was able to pivot but I don't know about any lateral play. I've not been able to find the drawings for No. 215 so I can't tell you how it worked, sadly.
5:49 I'm beginning to notice your particular fondness for Single Wheelers. First Planet and now the G class (though the Adams Radial Tank was a much smarter engine on appearance than Stirling's singles, hehe)
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory @hythekent I know this question is two years old, but I believe the correct answer is "Blackie", a 0-4-2T built by Hawthorn & Co. in 1859. It is on display at Cape Town station, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
They were tough men doing a tough job - The Great Northern Railway didn't even issue it's engine drivers or firemen with any form of uniform other than a cap! Engineers and Boards of Directors didn't think loco crews should be mollycoddled. Cabs and whatnot were OK for the colonies like India or Australia but not at home. Some of the earliest British locos with a fully enclosed cab were Stroudley's "Terriers" in 1872 but even then fully enclosed cabs remained rare, or were seen as either an Americanism or pandering to the crews.
There's also the story about a Webb 'Jennie Deans' compound supplied to the Pennsylvania Railroad, sent with its typically skimpy LNWR cab. The Pensy's master mechanic duly noted 'locomotive supplied without cab.........'@@AnthonyDawsonHistory
Hi @@JohnDavies-cn3ro It's not just a story but absolute fact that a Webb 2-2-2-0 'Dreadnought' Compound was supplied by Beyer, Peacock & Co to the Pennsylvania RR. It was the PRR's No. 1320 and was most certainly supplied with a cab. The drawings for the loco show a cab, as do works photographs. Depending on which reports you read, it either performed well or was not handled correctly and shook itself to bits on the American track. Given it was a Beyer, Peacock engine the quality would have been absolutely superb, and it certainly would have been a good locomotive. They never turned out a duff 'un. 🙂
I built a 00guage model of this engine in brass and motorized it over40 year ago I have it along with other models of the same period in a cabinet they are all working models.
So, Anthony, she only became a 4-2-2, once the leading four wheels became a bogie. What was the wheel arrangement designated prior to that? Bizarre, the driving wheels weren't flanged. Your poor cat, Sox. I know the pain felt of what it is like to lose a long-time pet. Condolences.
As built, like "Iron Duke" with a rigid wheelbase No. 215 was a 2-2-2-2. Four independent axles. Flangeless driving wheels were quite common on locomotives with a long wheelbase: it helps them pass around curves and reduces lateral strain on the track and the axle. Robert Stephenson included it in his 1833 patent for "Patentee". Even in the C20th something like the BR Standard 9F (2-10-) which had a leading pony-truck had its middle driving wheel without flanges to help it take curves.
@@minuil516 well, "La Porteña" was built in 1856 alongside her sister "La Argentina" by E.B. Wilson & Co. of Leeds and delivered on Christmas day that same year, her sister being delivered at a later date. Their works numbers were 570 for LP and 571 for LA. Despite what you may find, "La Porteña" always carried the number 1 and "La Argentina" the number 2. On January 28th, 1857, "La Porteña" steamed for the first time outside her shed, which attracted quite a big crowd. Another series of tests were carried out the months before the inauguration on August 29th, most of those being successful. The first public revenue service was on August 30th. It ran for about 43 years, being withdrawn in 1890. It was stored at the La Plata workshops until 1923 when she was aquired by the "Museo Histórico de Luján" (where she now resides). She steamed once again on August 30th, 1957 commemorating the Centenary of the railways. She was originally built as a 0-4-0ST but was later rebuilt as a 2-2-0ST following a series of problems regarding the coupling rod and the crosshead slider. Her sister was sold to Paraguay in 1869 by President Sarmiento alongside engines n°3 "Constitución", n°5, n°6 (both names unknown) and n°9 "Independencia". A nice little fun fact is that you can find the engine on the old $50 bill, the one with Sarmiento.
@@martinchalimoniuk3547 There's a lot of unsubstantiated rubbish in the English langauge about her inasmuch as she was built for service in the Crimean War (which she wasnt) and that the Crimean Railway was built to a gauge of 5ft 6in (which it wasn't) but that's why Argentina's railways were laid at 5ft 6in because they re-used the locos, rolling stock and track from the Crimea. But that is just pure fiction! Yet you see it in print occasionally still today.The theory originates toward the end of the C19th and blossomed from there, eventually becoming 'fact' as these things tend to do..... have you ever heard that story at all?
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory of course I've heard it! Here's a link with three of the myths surrounding the engine, published by the most important railway magazine in the country (there are some typos, maybe they used Google Translate, hehe). www.trenrodantedata.com/links/note/43
The pictures shew the leading wheels fixed in axleboxes in the frame, but with a compensating bar between the axle box springs. (There is even a compensating beam between the drier and the trailing azle and that is not a bogie. As far as I know, a bogie has to have a central pivot/swing links/whatever above a four wheel truck, free to pivot independent of the frames. Am I right, or am right?
The overwhelming majority of photographs of 215 show it fitted with a bogie. The lining out clearly demarks where the bogie was. The frame was cut away to allow for the bogie to be fitted. All the images of 215 in this video are of the locomotive in rebuilt form with bogie.The wheels of the bogie were indeed compensated and the driving wheels and trailing wheels were also compensated. The bogie frame was able to shift laterally and also pivot to help guide the locomotive into curves. There was no connection between the bogie and any other wheels. It had a proper bogie.
Which locomotive would you suggest in her place? Certainly the 8ft singles were legends in their own lifetime and praised for their austere, Doric, beauty. :-)
I don't know there cold ever be a 'best' I prefer therein singles, the Midland 's[innrs' and many others.The SE^ CR E class (?)were superb as well and some ofthe Caledonian engines were. I just donlt like the GN cabs±so blunt and spartan. Anyway its fun to speculate. :-)
He was a conscientious historian; he had a passion for his subject. A decent modeller and involved in early railway preservation. I enjoy the original Railway stories, especially those which have a grain of truth to them. He was certainly an interesting character; I greatly admire his Pacifism and the morality of his stories never have anyone being thrown on the scrap heap, or lost forever - there's always a chance at redemption, forgiveness, of a new start.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory Stanley was the no. 2 engine on the Mid Sodor Railway. He was a Baldwin 10-12 purchased from the MoD in 1920. He was rough riding and frequently derailed. He refused to change and was turned into a pumping engine. His failure in 1947 flooded the Cas-Ny-Hawin mine which resulted in the ultimate closure of the Mid Sodor Railway. While Duke was ultimately rescued, the Reverend never commented on Stanley, so the assumption is he was left to rot.
I am sorry to disagree with the narrator but this is NOT a bogie as generally understood, ie a swivekking pair of carrying wheels. The Sturrock "bogie" is like that used on the GWR by Daniel Gooch- ie the wheel are fixed and cannot rotate. Suitable for railways with long straight lines like the GNR and thye GWR but not any where else4. that is why most other main line railways (eg the Midland, MS&LR, LNWR to name a few, used 2-4-) express passenger locos (and of course Stroudley on the LB&SCR never used bogies). The first proper fron bogie wheels used on express locos were by Thomas Wheatley in his 1871 4-4-0 for the NBR, James Stirling for the G&SWR, S W Johnson for the Midland etc..sorry but this documentary needs to be completely rebroadast avoiding the incoirrect references to the bogies for the Sturrock loco!
Thanks for your input, but Sturrock himself said that the leading four wheels were grouped on a "moveable carriage in front". Gooch used a fixed wheelbase; the leading four wheels of e.g. Iron Duke were not able to move, so it was a 2-2-2-2. Which is how 215 was first built, with a fixed, rigid wheelbase. However, in November 1853 as Sturrock notes a swivelling bogie was fitted. To quote his biographer, Tony Vernon "Sturrock had the leading four wheels converted to a bogie." Sturrock notes thar 215 was "An engine with 7 foot 6 inch driving wheels, a four-wheeled bogie in front, and a pair of carrying wheels in rear". It is clear from Sturrock's own notes, and descriptions of the engine 215 had a four-wheel leading bogie from November 1853.
I'm such a child. A M.E. too. But I can't help being amused by erudite people talking about bogeys...... (Yes, I know the spelling is different.........)
She was a handsome machine, indeed. The paintwork displayed in the color painting is stylish.
Sorry to hear about Sox, as a former cat owner I know the same grief and you have my deepest sympathies.
Sturrock could design an handsome machine; I think it's also noteworthy that Patrick Stirling who designed the legendary GNR 8ft singles, was the works manager at R & W Hawthorns of Newcastle where No. 215 was built. The domeless boiler became a signature of Stirling.
My partner and I are both heart-broken about Mrs Sox. She arrived as a tiny kitten in our back yard; some neighbours had got her to save their marriage but they broke up, moved out, and left her behind! Sox was absolutely determined she was going to live with us and got a forever home. Just not as long as we all hoped :(
Just try to imagine what 75mph was for the people in 1853!
RIP Sox.
With that cab - more than a bit drafy one would imagine.
Always good to see a review of a Sturrock locomotive! Sturrock was my great-great grandfather Probably the most comprehensive description of the story of 215 is available in Groves Locomotives of the GNR volume 1 pages 65-68. Sturrock's own views on 215 are recorded in my book 'Archibald Sturrock Pioneer Locomotive Engineer.' He was convinced it achieved what had been promised. However the expenditure on 215 was probably hard to justify. Groves notes its mileage for the period up to December 1864 was noticeably less than the large Hawthorn 2-2-2 singles which were used for the same services.
So the 8 ft was a successors to the 215 then such a fitting concept for such a beautiful locomotive
Oh I'm sorry to hear Anthony of your loss.
Thanks, Pete
Condolences re Mrs Sox. Cats can be great companions.
Aesthetically, 215 is probably one of my favourite engines, that I first came across in N Groves' "Great Northern Locomotive History: Volume One", while finding about the engines the Great Northern Railway lent to the Metropolitan Railway in 1863. The 'Little Sharpies' in early converted 0-4-2t form remain something of a mystery, in terms of their appearance. I wonder if some of the sketches sometimes referred to as based on 'official' drawings in that book are conjectural or the work of G F Bird. There's an interesting article in the Locomotive Magazine (1908, I think, don't have it to hand) about the 'Early Locomotive History of the Metropolitan Railway'.
Oh, what an interesting thing.
excellent. another one i didnt know of.
Great video as always, Anthony. I'm really sorry about your cat, as a cat person myself I've gone through that situation more times than I'd like. You'll always have our support.
Thank you Martin. That means a lot. Sox was a rescue kitten; she turned up in the garden after having been left behind by her previous family who got her to save their marriage. They broke up, moved out, and left her behind. She was determined to live with us but was also very scared of men, especially tall men. So she got a happily ever after, even if the ever after wasn't as long as everyone had hoped the poor love.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory sometimes life plays you those nasty tricks, but at the end of the day, what matters is that you gave that sweet kitten the love she wouldn't have gotten otherwise. Don't be afraid to rescue another cat, that's the best kind of love you can give.
@@martinchalimoniuk3547 Thank you so much. We love her so much and she loves us too.
I knew nothing of this engine but I adore its lines already, got to love those open cabs and spec plates combined with the beautiful, yet almost alien frame design. Interesting to see this one has a compensating beam, which I tend to associate with North American 4-4-0s of the same vintage.
Sturrock liked to use compensating levers between axles and they figured prominently on many of his designs.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory I just had a look at a few of his other engines, you're absolutely right, nearly all of them have compensating bars between at least the front driving axles (which is to say an 0-4-2 tank and that bonkers 0-6-0+0-6-0 tender locomotive thing) I assume this was extra important on the bogie 4-2-2 to help with traction on that single driving wheel. It seems to be a feature that fell out of favor in Britain to some extent, was there a reason for that?
@@RockyRailroadProductions_B0SS It was to help with adhesion and track-holding. I think the general opinion in the UK that compensating levers/beams were too much trouble... the Great Northern didn't have the best permanent way in the world and compensating beams/levels/equalising beams (whatever you call them) helped prevent track damage through providing four points of suspension for a six-wheeler rather than three, spreading the load and help keep it on the track. Other lines like the LNWR with a far higher standard of p/way didn't use them.
Very informative. I would have mistaken that loco for a Sterling Single at first look.
Could you once maybe do a video on Engerth locomotives? They were a very popular design for a mountain locomotive for quite some time and the oldest preserved example is I 103 "Kladno", built in 1855, but i don't think the design is very well known nowadays.
Looks like a cross between Iron Duke and Jenny Lind.
Are there no depiction of the engine with the bogie arrangement? Unless I’m mistaken, all of the ones shown were with the fixed frame.
Also, my condolences for your loss. Cats have so heartbreakingly short lives. :(
Actually, I believe all of the depictions here do show the lead bogie, it's just that it's designed in such a way that it blends almost flush with the frames. Certainly a visually deceptive and yet very pleasing approach.
All the images I used show No. 215 with a bogey. Finding depictions of No. 215 *without* the bogey are difficult as he only ran in that form for a few months and photography was in its infancy. There is a photo of her with a fixed frame but it's very grainy.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory OK, thanks for clarifying. That is a very snug fit indeed then, I guess the bogie frame slides/turns freely in the slot cut in the main frame.
@@sirrliv yes, it looks like you’re right. It’s almost as if the bogie frame was cut from the old frame.
@@foowashere Yeah it does. Very cleverly done and very neat and tidy.
Love the various voices and accents you use.
Thank you! 😃
Mein gott what a stunning machine.
Glad you think so! Such a really elegant locomotive.
Out of curiosity, have you heard of a locomotive with the name "John Stevens", It ran on the Camden & Amboy Railroad. Also, I love seeing your videos about early Locomotives with such detail, keep up the good work.
I have yes! I am currently working on a book on the Planet and Samson loco, and which includes a chapter on all the Stephenson locos exported to the US. It's a very complicated story but one which needs telling :-)
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory I look forward to reading your book when its finished, I cant wait.
Another brilliant video there! Very interesting and thank you for posting. Talking of Sturrock, are you considering doing a video on the Sturrock Steam Tender locomotive? That would be amazing! I’m so sorry for your loss, your poor cat
I am yes, as well as other 'steam tender' locomotives. It was not a new idea, no unique to Sturrock.
Excellent video. Excellent script.
Please could you reduce the sound level of the background "music".
Having whetted our appetites you must now tell us more about the "Earl of Airlie".
Such an episode is in production.
And the Chapman locomotive!
Love the video :)
#RIPSOX🥀
@@sebastianthomsen2225 Thankyou. A video on the Chapman Chain engine is in development, including CGI animation. Watch this space.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory :D 👍
Are there any drawings available of good detail of this engine? I'd be quite interested to see how the frame was modified and the early bogie design fitted in
Not that I know of. Unless there's some lurking in the R & W Hawthorn archive, if it exists. I wasn't able to track any down.
Good to see this fine engine finally getting some attention!
Thankyou. I could have said a whole lot more, and demolished a load of myths which have grown up about her - especially the one that she was a failure and didn't run - but this is just a primer. At least she's getting better known! :)
Not sure if there’s anything notable about it, but I’ve always wanted to know more about the montparnasse derailment locomotive, (type 120 no 721). I’ve seen some of your videos on French locomotives which is what prompted me to ask! Relatively new subscriber but I’m very much enjoying the content so far. Keep up the great work! (Sorry to hear about your cat): )
Thankyou! And watch this space :)
Lovely video, I found it very interesting
Glad you enjoyed it, thankyou.
good stuff. Any chance you could do a short one on Sturrocks 'steam tender 0-6-6-0's?
Hi Jon - you're the second person to ask today :-) Yes I'm gong to look at the steam tender, and its antecendents. Not a new idea or universal to Mr Sturrock :-)
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory that will be great, saw an 00 scale model of one years ago and never have found out much about em. thanks in avance
@@stashyjon There was a fantastic large scale live steam model for sale about 18 months ago. Marvellous thing.
Was the bogie fitted a pivoted frame for the front wheels, which is not a bogie compared to the later Adams type where there was curved lateral play in the bogie wheels allowing a more tangential set to the rail curvature. Thankyou for the video, please keep doing videos on these early locos.
It was able to pivot but I don't know about any lateral play. I've not been able to find the drawings for No. 215 so I can't tell you how it worked, sadly.
Another great one! Thank you for making these! :)
My pleasure! glad you enjoyed it.
5:49 I'm beginning to notice your particular fondness for Single Wheelers. First Planet and now the G class (though the Adams Radial Tank was a much smarter engine on appearance than Stirling's singles, hehe)
Singles are just so elegant. They just look so effortles.
Sorry to hear about Sox - there's no point having them if you don't love them, and, if you love them, there's price to pay......
The background music was pleasant but I found it rather distracting. Sorry about Sox.
Wow, what a find. A channel about pioneer locos. Really enjoyable thanks. Do you know what the first loco was in Southern Africa?
Thank you very much. I'm glad you're enjoying my channel. Um, sadly I don't know but can do a bit of research for you.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory @hythekent I know this question is two years old, but I believe the correct answer is "Blackie", a 0-4-2T built by Hawthorn & Co. in 1859. It is on display at Cape Town station, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
😮so that’s how the stirling single was made
It's amazing that, with all the new steam technology, there was so little consideration given to the safety and comfort of the operators.
They were tough men doing a tough job - The Great Northern Railway didn't even issue it's engine drivers or firemen with any form of uniform other than a cap! Engineers and Boards of Directors didn't think loco crews should be mollycoddled. Cabs and whatnot were OK for the colonies like India or Australia but not at home. Some of the earliest British locos with a fully enclosed cab were Stroudley's "Terriers" in 1872 but even then fully enclosed cabs remained rare, or were seen as either an Americanism or pandering to the crews.
There's also the story about a Webb 'Jennie Deans' compound supplied to the Pennsylvania Railroad, sent with its typically skimpy LNWR cab. The Pensy's master mechanic duly noted 'locomotive supplied without cab.........'@@AnthonyDawsonHistory
Hi @@JohnDavies-cn3ro It's not just a story but absolute fact that a Webb 2-2-2-0 'Dreadnought' Compound was supplied by Beyer, Peacock & Co to the Pennsylvania RR. It was the PRR's No. 1320 and was most certainly supplied with a cab. The drawings for the loco show a cab, as do works photographs. Depending on which reports you read, it either performed well or was not handled correctly and shook itself to bits on the American track. Given it was a Beyer, Peacock engine the quality would have been absolutely superb, and it certainly would have been a good locomotive. They never turned out a duff 'un. 🙂
I built a 00guage model of this engine in brass and motorized it over40 year ago I have it along with other models of the same period in a cabinet they are all working models.
Oh how fabulous!
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory Thanks.
No mention of R & W Hawthorn?
So, Anthony, she only became a 4-2-2, once the leading four wheels became a bogie. What was the wheel arrangement designated prior to that? Bizarre, the driving wheels weren't flanged. Your poor cat, Sox. I know the pain felt of what it is like to lose a long-time pet. Condolences.
As built, like "Iron Duke" with a rigid wheelbase No. 215 was a 2-2-2-2. Four independent axles. Flangeless driving wheels were quite common on locomotives with a long wheelbase: it helps them pass around curves and reduces lateral strain on the track and the axle. Robert Stephenson included it in his 1833 patent for "Patentee". Even in the C20th something like the BR Standard 9F (2-10-) which had a leading pony-truck had its middle driving wheel without flanges to help it take curves.
LoL that's 'Bogie' :-)
I would found intresting if you talk about the first steam engine on argentina, its just something that i would like
Are you from Argentina, too? There's not much to say about "La Porteña" that can't be found online, but yeah, that would be a nice video.
@@martinchalimoniuk3547 ye i am, it's funny causé la porteña was the first steam locomotive that i saw, thats mainly why i Made this comment
@@minuil516 well, "La Porteña" was built in 1856 alongside her sister "La Argentina" by E.B. Wilson & Co. of Leeds and delivered on Christmas day that same year, her sister being delivered at a later date. Their works numbers were 570 for LP and 571 for LA. Despite what you may find, "La Porteña" always carried the number 1 and "La Argentina" the number 2. On January 28th, 1857, "La Porteña" steamed for the first time outside her shed, which attracted quite a big crowd. Another series of tests were carried out the months before the inauguration on August 29th, most of those being successful. The first public revenue service was on August 30th. It ran for about 43 years, being withdrawn in 1890. It was stored at the La Plata workshops until 1923 when she was aquired by the "Museo Histórico de Luján" (where she now resides). She steamed once again on August 30th, 1957 commemorating the Centenary of the railways.
She was originally built as a 0-4-0ST but was later rebuilt as a 2-2-0ST following a series of problems regarding the coupling rod and the crosshead slider. Her sister was sold to Paraguay in 1869 by President Sarmiento alongside engines n°3 "Constitución", n°5, n°6 (both names unknown) and n°9 "Independencia".
A nice little fun fact is that you can find the engine on the old $50 bill, the one with Sarmiento.
@@martinchalimoniuk3547 There's a lot of unsubstantiated rubbish in the English langauge about her inasmuch as she was built for service in the Crimean War (which she wasnt) and that the Crimean Railway was built to a gauge of 5ft 6in (which it wasn't) but that's why Argentina's railways were laid at 5ft 6in because they re-used the locos, rolling stock and track from the Crimea. But that is just pure fiction! Yet you see it in print occasionally still today.The theory originates toward the end of the C19th and blossomed from there, eventually becoming 'fact' as these things tend to do..... have you ever heard that story at all?
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory of course I've heard it! Here's a link with three of the myths surrounding the engine, published by the most important railway magazine in the country (there are some typos, maybe they used Google Translate, hehe).
www.trenrodantedata.com/links/note/43
The pictures shew the leading wheels fixed in axleboxes in the frame, but with a compensating bar between the axle box springs. (There is even a compensating beam between the drier and the trailing azle and that is not a bogie. As far as I know, a bogie has to have a central pivot/swing links/whatever above a four wheel truck, free to pivot independent of the frames. Am I right, or am right?
The overwhelming majority of photographs of 215 show it fitted with a bogie. The lining out clearly demarks where the bogie was. The frame was cut away to allow for the bogie to be fitted. All the images of 215 in this video are of the locomotive in rebuilt form with bogie.The wheels of the bogie were indeed compensated and the driving wheels and trailing wheels were also compensated. The bogie frame was able to shift laterally and also pivot to help guide the locomotive into curves. There was no connection between the bogie and any other wheels. It had a proper bogie.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory Thank you!
@@johnjephcote7636 my pleasure. hope it clears it up.
GNE No1 the most beautiful engine ever built? I don't think so. :-( Lovely video of course. :-)
Which locomotive would you suggest in her place? Certainly the 8ft singles were legends in their own lifetime and praised for their austere, Doric, beauty. :-)
I don't know there cold ever be a 'best' I prefer therein singles, the Midland 's[innrs' and many others.The SE^ CR E class (?)were superb as well and some ofthe Caledonian engines were. I just donlt like the GN cabs±so blunt and spartan. Anyway its fun to speculate. :-)
What’s your opinion on the works of the Reverend Wilbert Awdry?
He was a conscientious historian; he had a passion for his subject. A decent modeller and involved in early railway preservation. I enjoy the original Railway stories, especially those which have a grain of truth to them. He was certainly an interesting character; I greatly admire his Pacifism and the morality of his stories never have anyone being thrown on the scrap heap, or lost forever - there's always a chance at redemption, forgiveness, of a new start.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory except for Stanley
@@connormclernon26 I have no idea who or what Stanley is. Certainly didn't figure in my childhood.
@@AnthonyDawsonHistory Stanley was the no. 2 engine on the Mid Sodor Railway. He was a Baldwin 10-12 purchased from the MoD in 1920. He was rough riding and frequently derailed. He refused to change and was turned into a pumping engine. His failure in 1947 flooded the Cas-Ny-Hawin mine which resulted in the ultimate closure of the Mid Sodor Railway. While Duke was ultimately rescued, the Reverend never commented on Stanley, so the assumption is he was left to rot.
@@connormclernon26 or s.c.ruffy
I am sorry to disagree with the narrator but this is NOT a bogie as generally understood, ie a swivekking pair of carrying wheels. The Sturrock "bogie" is like that used on the GWR by Daniel Gooch- ie the wheel are fixed and cannot rotate. Suitable for railways with long straight lines like the GNR and thye GWR but not any where else4. that is why most other main line railways (eg the Midland, MS&LR, LNWR to name a few, used 2-4-) express passenger locos (and of course Stroudley on the LB&SCR never used bogies). The first proper fron bogie wheels used on express locos were by Thomas Wheatley in his 1871 4-4-0 for the NBR, James Stirling for the G&SWR, S W Johnson for the Midland etc..sorry but this documentary needs to be completely rebroadast avoiding the incoirrect references to the bogies for the Sturrock loco!
"swivelling" sorry typo
Thanks for your input, but Sturrock himself said that the leading four wheels were grouped on a "moveable carriage in front". Gooch used a fixed wheelbase; the leading four wheels of e.g. Iron Duke were not able to move, so it was a 2-2-2-2. Which is how 215 was first built, with a fixed, rigid wheelbase. However, in November 1853 as Sturrock notes a swivelling bogie was fitted. To quote his biographer, Tony Vernon "Sturrock had the leading four wheels converted to a bogie." Sturrock notes thar 215 was "An engine with 7 foot 6 inch driving wheels, a four-wheeled bogie in front, and a pair of carrying wheels in rear". It is clear from Sturrock's own notes, and descriptions of the engine 215 had a four-wheel leading bogie from November 1853.
www.gnrsociety.com/locomotive-class/4-2-2-no-215/
I'm such a child. A M.E. too. But I can't help being amused by erudite people talking about bogeys...... (Yes, I know the spelling is different.........)
A very erudite account, shame about the predictive text.
Sturrock, not Stark.grrrrrrrrrrrr to impoverished subtitles.