Beyer-Garratt by Jeremy Clemenst by TransportTreasuryPublishing

Price:- £50

TRANSPORT TREASURY PUBLISHING

BEYER-GARRATT JEREMY CLEMENTS

rom the 1830s onward, there were hundreds of attempts to design articulated steam locomotives of which only a tiny percentage achieved commercial viability. The last to join this exclusive band was the Garratt, a British invention which unquestionably proved to be the most successful articulated steam locomotive type.The idea was born of engineer Herbert Garratt’s extensive experience with overseas railways that operated in difficult terrain and under challenging circumstances.Adoption by Beyer Peacock & Co Ltd, the highly regarded locomotive builder of Gorton Foundry,Manchester led to the type’s 1909 inauguration in Tasmania. By the First World War, thirty-one examples had been delivered or were under construction.This diverse group embraced seven wheel arrangements and five gauges from 2’ 0” to 5’ 3”, with designs ranging from miniscule tramway engines to 8-cylinder high speed double-Atlantics – cogent evidence of adaptability and competence. The 1920s saw progressive size increases culminating in eight-coupled giants that handled vast tonnages on five continents. With expiry of the original patent and product re-styling as the “Beyer-Garratt”, Gorton Foundry fought off challenges to its market leadership and during World War 2 played a pivotal role in military rail transportation. Post-war, the type accounted for the majority of Beyer Peacock’s steam production.Although production had ceased by the late 1950s, Beyer-Garratts continued to render sterling service in numerous countries. A century after introduction, there were still isolated examples at work in normal service.This is a story of courage, creativity, superb engineering, and adventure in the cause of mankind’s most romantic form of transport.

BEYER-GARRATT

JEREMY CLEMENTS Transport Treasury Publishing

People and Patents

BEYER-GARRATT

Jeremy Clements

Reviving the memories of yesterday… © Images and design: The Transport Treasury 2023. Text Jeremy Clements. ISBN 978-1-915281-05-0 First published in 2023 by Transport Treasury Publishing Ltd., 16 Highworth Close, High Wycombe, HP13 7PJ www.ttpublishing.co.uk Printed in the UK by Short Run Press The copyright holders hereby give notice that all rights to this work are reserved. Aside from brief passages for the purpose of review, no part of this work may be reproduced, copied by electronic or other means, or otherwise stored in any information storage and retrieval system without written permission from the Publisher. This includes the illustrations herein which shall remain the copyright of the copyright holder. Front cover [upper]: Introduced 1939/ 40, Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC3 (later East African Railways Class 57) were the first 4-8-4+4-8-4s anywhere. Incorporating several new features, they were a significant advance over earlier KUR Garratts. Weighing over 186 tons, they had wide route availability on account of their 11.75 tons axle loading and flangeless leading driving wheels. Their arrival was fortuitous as they took over Mombasa-Nairobi services greatly burdened by traffic increases due to the War. Each typically ran 200,000 miles between general repairs with monthly averages exceeding 5,000. Originally KUR No. 87 Karamoja, No. 5711 was at Eldoret, Kenya in September 1967 with the Giesl Ejector fitted in the fleet-wide programme of 1959/60. Simon Colbeck Collection Front cover [lower]: The Antofagasta (Chile) & Bolivia Railway was a pre-Great War sales target which opted instead for six Kitson-Meyer-type 2-6-0+0-6-2s, the only non-Garratt articulated engines built by BP during the 20th Century. In 1929, the A(C)&BR bowed to further sales efforts by buying three 4-8-2+2-8-4s followed by six to the same basic design in 1950. The later engines differed mainly in the streamlined tank and bunker profiles plus a minor change in wheelbase and slight weight increase. These Garratts were favoured for branch lines, one of which reached an altitude of 15,705 ft. Ferrocarril La Paz Antofagasta No. 905 Illimani (following nationalisation by the Bolivian government) shows evidence of the arid, dusty terrain which this railway penetrated. Transport Treasury Frontispiece: Garratts built by Beyer Peacock for express passenger duties were a rare breed and those on the São Paulo Railway, Brazil were the longest-lived. Introduced in 1927, the six members of 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class R1 worked 500-ton trains over a 70-mile route that included several 1 in 40 gradients to schedules which demanded start-to-stop average speeds over 40 mph. After four years, they were converted to double-pacifics to improve high speed stability and to increase water capacity. Such extensive post-delivery modifications were unusual for a Garratt; the work was carried out in Brazil using components supplied by Gorton. The class then performed well until 1950 when declared redundant by route electrification. This colour plate was distributed with The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review for January 1928. Tailpiece: Operators that purchased Garratts over several years usually specified size increases with later acquisitions but 3’ 6” gauge Nigerian Government Railways reversed this trend. Classified 201, a pair of 4-8-2+2-8-4s acquired in 1930 were the largest ever to work on 45 lb/ yard rail which was prevalent in the north of the country. Unfortunately they were too powerful for the traffic on offer so the twenty-two Class 501 Garratts delivered between 1935 and 1943 were smaller double-Pacifics. This colour plate issued by Beyer Peacock shows No. 502 Emir of Katsina (later renamed Sultan of Sokoto) in the handsome NGR maroon livery. This engine is thought to have been withdrawn in 1954. Rear cover: Beyer Peacock’s sales of Garratts to India were few although War Department engines excelled on metre gauge routes in the east of the country from 1943 onwards. However, the fleet of the 5’ 6” gauge Bengal-Nagpur Railway comprised the largest steam engines ever used in the sub-Continent and were highly competent in handling heavy mineral traffic. They regularly hauled 1600 tons up 1 in 100 gradients, unassisted. The BNR operated a total of 22 Garratts of which 16 were 4-8-0+0-8-4s, a wheel arrangement unique to this system. Introduced in 1929, they were officially withdrawn in 1970-2 although one example was noted on departmental-type duties as late as 2002. Class N No. 815 now resides as an imposing exhibit in the National Railway Museum, Delhi.

People and Patents

Contents

Introduction

.............................................................................................

Chapter : 1

People and patents

Chapter : 2

Design and manufacture

Chapter : 3

Selling Garratts ............................................................... 54

Chapter : 4

Before the Great War ......................................................... 74

Chapter : 5

Garratt versus the rest ...................................................... 92

Chapter : 6

South African Saga ........................................................... 110

Chapter : 7

Inter-war four-coupled production .................................. 134

Chapter : 8

Inter-war six-coupled production .................................... 142

Chapter : 9

Failure in New Zealand ..................................................... 180

Chapter : 10

Inter-war eight-coupled production ................................ 196

Chapter : 11

War machines .................................................................... 242

Chapter : 12

Indian summer .................................................................. 258

Chapter : 13

Last bastions ..................................................................... 288

Chapter : 14

Ideas and proposals ......................................................... 300

Chapter : 15

Closing years .................................................................... 310

Appendix : A

Articulated designs and locomotive types ..................... 314

Appendix : B

Principal commercial steam locomotive builders ......... 317

Appendix : C

Garratt locomotives built by other manufacturers ........ 318

Appendix : D

Summary of Garratts built at Gorton Foundry ............... 326

Appendix : E

Reports by C Williams on SAR Class GB No. 1650 ....... 331

Appendix : F

Letter dated 9 July 1945 from Bengal & Assam Railway .............................................................. 332

Appendix : G

Locomotive names ........................................................... 333

Bibliography

............................................................................................ 336

Index

............................................................................................ 337

.....................................................

........................................... 24

Beyer-Garratt Introduction

he Garratt was the last design to join that exclusive family of articulated and semiarticulated locomotive types that had emerged from a mass of theory to achieve commercial and operational viability. Around one hundred years later a few survivors were still engaged in ordinary service long after Mallets, Fairlies, Meyers etc had been despatched to their respective Valhallas.

gathered momentum thereafter. Endorsement of a mainstream operator was vital which is why the chequered experiences in South Africa during the 1920s have been addressed at such length. Validation of the concept and of Beyer Peacock’s preeminent role in face of corporate hostility and competitive forces sustained by doubtful commercial practices presented severe obstacles. At the end of a decade beset with challenges, there was deserved satisfaction through the success of a design whose boiler diameter was more than twice the rail gauge. Effective large Garratts had been built before but this seminal design confirmed Gorton Foundry’s unassailable supremacy in the genre. It established the format for the race of distinguished giants that would follow from 1939 onward.

An idea born of practical experience in running railways under extreme circumstances found a secure home within the body of Beyer, Peacock & Co. Ltd, an organisation which from inception had embraced a culture of high quality engineering. This characteristic stemmed directly from Charles Beyer whose combination of innate skills and obsessive appetite for hard work had raised him from a near starvation existence to become a pre-eminent practitioner in a profession at the forefront of the Industrial Revolution.

The 1930s were dominated by the Depression during which period the company struggled to survive, as did so much of UK heavy industry. Sales were reviving when World War 2 imposed fundamental changes in production philosophy. Apart from the burden of munitions manufacture and completion of outstanding pre-war orders, the company undertook the greater proportion of design work for new construction at Gorton and by other locomotive builders. Orders for new Garratt designs from 1943 onward which required construction against almost impossible deadlines heralded greater emphasis on mass production techniques.

The culture and qualities injected by Beyer and his two partners at the outset of the enterprise were robust and firmly based. Their successors were in the same mould, ensuring that products second to none were sustained down the years. It was notable that when the traditional activities of Beyer Peacock ceased for want of custom, the limited company formed from the founding partnership was still in sound financial condition. This was an unusual achievement in a dying industry and spoke volumes for the calibre of the management, the workforce, and their products.

Heightened standardisation during the war led to fewer individual designs but with significantly more locomotives in each type. Even so, Gorton Foundry retained its ability to produce engines for specific needs as exemplified in the last fresh design which comprised 14 axles, weighed 66 tons, and worked with great success on lightly laid 2’ 6” gauge trackwork. This exercise was as impressive as the giants of the post-war era that weighed 150 tons and more.

In this environment, why the Garratt concept was so successful is the better understood. The template was formulated before the Great War through sale of 31 locomotives mainly to existing, satisfied customers. These machines produced in less than six years, were extraordinary for their diversity. They encompassed tramway engines through to eight-cylinder express passenger machines across five different gauges and seven different wheel arrangements. This spectrum foretold a future in which the concept would satisfy a complex variety of needs.

With so much diversity, endeavouring to chart a lucid theme during and after the South African chapter of the 1920s has presented organisational challenges. Design evolution has been divided between sixand eight-coupled power bogies in an attempt to monitor how Gorton Foundry tackled the needs imposed by growth in locomotive size and weight. Cross-reference has been necessary to help bind

Allowing for a degree of generalisation, the story falls into distinct episodes. Development was delayed during the 1914-8 period but gradually 4

People and Patents

the strands together, and hopefully this approach has assisted presentation of a story characterised by courage, enterprise, innovation, and more than a little romance.

Joe but his warmth and helpfulness typified the enduring friendly relations that contribute so much to this wonderful hobby. --- o O o ---

Apart from the reference sources listed in the Bibliography, the author has been fortunate in gaining access through the publisher to files containing technical papers, reports and official photographs. This collection had been assembled by the late Colin Garratt, the renowned railway photographer and author who had been collecting material for a book at the time of his sad passing. It is sincerely hoped that this work does justice to his original intentions.

In June 1971, the author was posted to Kenya after three years of working in railway-less parts of what was then condescendingly referred to as the ‘Third World’. Following two busy days in Nairobi with no spare time to investigate the nearby railway, he was sent to work in the town of Meru on the northeastern shoulder of Mount Kenya. He then knew nothing of Kenya’s railway system but had noted metre gauge lines in the distance on the journey upcountry.

That valuable source has been amplified by access to the Beyer Peacock files in the care of the Science + Industry Museum, Manchester which in turn led to a search of the photographic records maintained by the Science Museum, South Kensington. The courtesy and ready assistance of the staff of these organisations is gratefully acknowledged. That the project should have advanced this far is due to the guidance of Kevin Robertson who, aware of the author’s preliminary attempts at a manuscript, was kind enough to convince the publisher that there were the bones of a book in those meagre beginnings. Sincere thanks to the publisher and to Kevin for their customary patience and assistance.

The first weekend, the boss borrowed a Land Rover for a drive around the back of the mountain and southwards to the town of Nanyuki and then onward a few miles further. The railhead in Nanyuki was briefly spotted with no sign of life, and the nonrailway minded boss was disinclined to investigate. However south of the town, it was apparent that the road paralleled the railway. In due course, the boss turned round to return to Meru by way of Nanyuki. Almost immediately, the author spotted a signal “off” for a southbound train so having successfully pleaded for a stop, he scampered the 100 yards or so over to the railway. Standing in the ‘three foot’, the line to the north was dead straight but rose and fell quite markedly with the contours. At least five miles or more distant a train was approaching at a fair pace and as it drew closer, it was disappointing to realise that the slab front and haze of black fumes above presaged diesel power. The train kept disappearing and re-appearing with the changing gradients. When it breasted the final rise and came into full view about half a mile away, the author realised to his intense joy that he had been mistaken.

Dr RF Hills, D Patrick and AE (Dusty) Durrant (an exSwindon man) are names synonymous with records of the Garratt saga. Their writings have played an important role in the preparation of this work, and further research has made it possible to expand upon and in certain respects, to correct information previously recorded. That process is endemic in railway writing and hopefully, more information will emerge to enable a future author to add substantively to the Garratt story. Invaluable also were the researches of the late Joe Lloyd who self-published a four volume description of all the engines built at Gorton Foundry plus a separate volume specifically focussed on the BeyerGarratt locomotive family. Joe’s work was based on many years of effort, the results of which were printed and distributed by himself. His volumes were produced in batches as and when there were sufficient orders on hand in a personal mission that greatly added to the collegiate store of knowledge. The author only ever spoke by telephone with

Gliding along, making easy work of a 6-coach train was oil-burning East African Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 60 No 6024 in smart lined maroon, bearing a polished brass number plate that somehow reminded of a certain English railway, and with a cheerful African footplate crew aboard. That is how it all started. Jeremy Clements County Meath, Ireland 5

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 1 : People and Patents

reation and development of the world’s finest articulated steam locomotive was interwoven with the history of Beyer, Peacock & Co., an enterprise formed in 1854. The founding partners were experienced in different engineering sectors and their complementary skills combined with an extraordinary work ethic saw creation of arguably Britain’s premier commercial locomotive manufacturer. The standards adopted from inception and inculcated in the culture of the business were sustained by succeeding generations through to cessation of locomotive construction in the late 1950s. Herbert Garratt became associated with the company roughly mid-way through that century of progress and achievement. His association with Beyer Peacock was sadly foreshortened by his premature passing but his contribution, born of varied engineering experiences in challenging circumstances, was immensely important to the second half of the company’s history. The association was cemented in the late 1920s, years after his death, when in face of fresh competitive forces, the company adopted the title by which the type is universally known – the Beyer-Garratt.

Charles Frederick Beyer (1813-1876) The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Knowing the young man’s straightened circumstances, Sharp offered financial help which was famously rejected in preference for more work. Beyer’s recruitment was apposite as the firm was moving from cotton spinning machinery into steam locomotive manufacture. Roberts was respected for design and production of machine tools which he foresaw as integral to improved construction methods. His achievements in building locomotives included improved building standards, and adoption of mechanised processes. He oversaw introduction of balanced driving wheels, curves in the upper edges of side frames to reduce the depth of horn plates for carrying axles, and ‘lap’ in slide valves to improve steam consumption. However his preference was machine tool development so Beyer assumed the greater responsibility for locomotive manufacture in the role of Chief Draughtsman from 1842.

Charles Frederick Bayer was born in Plauen, a village in Saxony, into a family of very modest circumstance. After elementary education, he followed his father’s trade of hand weaving but soon displayed unusual ability in model making and in sketching. His mother arranged extra curricula training and a visiting doctor helped him gain admittance to a recently opened polytechnic school in Dresden. His father resisted this course as he lacked the resources to support his talented son. Helped with a modest grant and by extra work part-time as a clerk and in other jobs, Beyer studied at Dresden for four years during which period his biggest challenge was to avoid starvation. On completion of his studies, he worked in the machine shop of a mill in Chemnitz where his progress brought him to the notice of the Saxon government,. In 1834, they commissioned him to report on England’s cotton spinning industry and during that visit he met several influential inventors, particularly Richard Roberts who later played an important role in his career development.

Beyer introduced proper engineering drawings supported by appropriate reference systems, and also full length inside frames. In 1842, he designed a six-wheeled tender with outside frames and axleboxes with footplate-mounted springs which remained a constant in British locomotive design, save for springs location. In 1846, an 0-6-0 of his design weighing 24 tons hauled 101 wagons aggregating 597 tons over 29 miles from the Manchester area to Crewe at an average speed of 13.7 mph. Around 1850 he was a pioneer applicant of the important principle of securing boilers only at the front end, leaving the rear resting on the frames to accommodate expansion. He also successfully raised the boiler centre line to improve running quality against prevailing received wisdom that a low centre of gravity was essential.

Beyer’s report influenced establishment of cotton spinning operations in Saxony, but he declined a senior position there as he had been impressed with manufacturing activities in England, then the centre of the Industrial Revolution. On return to Britain, he was first employed as an improver draughtsman by Sharp, Roberts & Co. Both the previously mentioned Roberts and his partner John Sharp recognised his qualities although this appointment displeased xenophobes who publicly deplored employment of a foreigner. However, the sector was short of talent with recruitment hampered by the secondary social status then accorded engineers. 6

People and Patents

Early four-wheeled locomotives built by Sharp Roberts & Co were largely unsuccessful. Their vertical cylinders induced rough riding which damaged trackwork. The Grand Junction Railway ordered ten locomotives in November 1835 and the task of their design was given to Beyer. He produced a more orthodox 2-2-2 that was the prototype for the Sharp Singles that established the company’s reputation for design and workmanship. This is a standard example of the type dating from 1847-8.

By 1849, having played an important part in production of 600 locomotives for Sharp Roberts, Beyer had become a major personality in the industry. John Sharp had died in 1842 and with Roberts’s retirement the following year, the firm was controlled by two of Sharp’s sons plus one John Robinson. The firm was re-titled Sharp Brothers with Beyer as Chief Engineer and Works Manager at the Atlas works. More changes followed in 1852 when Beyer became a naturalised Englishman, one of the Sharps retired, CP Stewart became a partner, and the firm’s name was again changed, this time to Sharp Stewart & Company.

in Manchester and in that institution’s commitment to technical education. He also helped the evolution of the Manchester College of Technology. Unflagging hard work brought declining health but he refused to take things easier and passed away in June 1876, aged 63. His legacies included gifts to several institutions, a major portion of which was deployed in construction of the Beyer Laboratories. Richard Peacock (1820-1889) A native of Swaledale Yorkshire, Peacock was born on 9 April 1820 as the seventh son of Ralph, a multi-talented individual whose principal work was as foreman of several lead mines. He also provided some medical services to humans and animals, and undertook repair of clocks and musical instruments. With such diverse technological interests, it was only natural to take Richard to the opening of the Stockton & Darlington Railway, and to be fully aware of the opportunities in the fledgling railway industry. Peacock senior left Swaledale in 1830 to become Assistant Superintendent with Messrs Walker & Burgess, contractors engaged in construction of Marsh Lane tunnel on the Leeds & Selby Railway.

Two factors apparently induced Beyer to leave the company. Around this time he proposed to and was rejected by a lady of the Sharp family, leading to lifelong bachelorhood. Also, based on his contribution to the firm’s success he had harboured expectations of becoming a partner; perhaps xenophobia had not fully dissipated. He then spent some months touring England and continental Europe before returning to Manchester to enter a partnership with Richard Peacock. Successful and wealthy in later years, Beyer never forgot his humble origins. He lived austerely, compensating for loneliness by working ever harder. His relaxation was through his country residence at Llangollen, near the estate of Henry Robertson, the third founding partner in the new enterprise

Richard Peacock attended Leeds Grammar School for four years before apprenticeship with Fenton, Murray and Jackson (later EB Wilson & Co), locomotive suppliers to the Liverpool & Manchester Railway. Competent engineers were in short supply so at age 18, he was appointed Locomotive Engineer of the Leeds & Selby Railway. In 1840, he joined the Great Western under Daniel Gooch and a year

Beyer had a strong sense of social responsibility and was a generous supporter of educational and religious initiatives. He was important in development of Owen’s College 7

Beyer-Garratt followed by their extension southward. Robertson was engaged by Locke to level and set out the West Coast route over Shap Fell. He then undertook civil engineering work on the Glasgow & Greenock Railway. This experience taught him much about handling contractors which led to consultative work on the disposal of the Welsh assets of a deceased Scottish ironmaster. He spent the rest of his career in England and Wales, developing the Brymbo Iron & Steel Companies, various collieries in the vicinity of Wrexham and Ruabon, and several railways in the area. Physical memorials to him are his viaducts at Ceiriog near Chirk and over the River Dee at Cefn. A knighthood in recognition of his achievements was prevented by his death so his son Henry Beyer Robertson received this honour in his stead. Robertson senior came to know Charles Beyer probably through the latter’s trading with Brymbo Iron or through supply of locomotives built by Sharp Roberts and successors to local railways. Exactly how the relationship developed is unclear but it was close enough for Beyer to become Godfather to Robertson’s daughter.

Richard Peacock (1820-1889) The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

later returned north as Locomotive Superintendent of the Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyme & Manchester Railway, later part of the Manchester, Sheffield & Lincolnshire Railway. His main achievement for that company was to establish their locomotive works at Gorton near Manchester, later known as ‘Gorton Tank’. The MS&LR became the Great Central Railway in 1897. Richard Peacock’s origins were also humble albeit without the vicissitudes that had beset Charles Beyer. He was married twice and at least one of his male descendants worked for the company. He retained broad interests and also held strong religious convictions. He was also a major public benefactor, strongly committed to social reform. He was Liberal Party MP for the Gorton division from 1885 until his death in 1889. Henry Robertson (1816-1888) The third founding partner is less well known, probably due to the omission of his name from the partnership title. Born in Banff, Scotland he was the youngest of eight children and a son of an officer in the Inland Revenue. The family’s circumstances were modest but Robertson received a good education through a scholarship to Aberdeen University at the age of 14 years. His family moved to Glasgow when he was aged 20, and his early career experience was in coal mining. A confident young man, he sought to start his own coal mine in Lanarkshire on land owned by the Duke of Hamilton who declined to co-operate on the grounds that he regarded Robertson was too young for such responsibility.

Henry Robertson (1816-1888) The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

As a successful civil engineer, Robertson brought a different yet complementary set of skills and experiences to the partnership. In simple terms, Beyer was the technician, Peacock the sales promoter and Robertson the expert on customers’ needs. The last-named would have been conscious of the impact of geography on railway operations although Shap Fell was a minor obstacle compared with the challenges that the partnership’s product had to confront in some overseas markets.

Stymied in this ambition, he became a pupil of Messrs Robert Stephenson & Joseph Locke who were then developing railways in the Edinburgh and Glasgow areas, 8

People and Patents The Partnership Through their differing backgrounds and temperaments, the partners’ collaboration proved fortuitous. Beyer’s preeminence in the industry was evident in hosting the founding meetings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers in 1846. George Stephenson was elected founder-President together with three vice-Presidents, two of whom were Charles Beyer and George E McConnell, Locomotive Superintendent of the London & North Western Railway (Southern Division). Mr Charles Geach (one of the founders of Birmingham & Midland Bank Ltd) was appointed Treasurer.

Beyer, Peacock & Co was formally constituted on 1 January 1855 whereby the partners assumed unlimited personal liability for the obligations of the new business. This was a legal environment quite different from the present day’s proprietorial protection provided by the limited liability company structure. The capital hunger was intense and the partners demonstrated their commitment by working extraordinarily hard to establish a firm footing for the business

Following the Great Western Railway’s initial incursion into the narrow gauge arena in 1854, the first new passenger locomotives were eight 2-2-2s of Class 69 ordered in 1855/ 6 by Daniel Gooch to his specification, as apparent in the broad gauge design characteristics. These were the first locomotives built by Messrs Beyer and Peacock (works Nos 1-4/ 15-18). According to BP expert Joe Lloyd, total price for the eight locomotives was £21,280 whereas they cost £23,373 to build which emphasised the need for Peacock’s commercial acumen in the sound development of the business. By 1864, BP’s reputation had grown to the extent that when Gooch ordered 30 members of 0-6-0 GWR Class 322 (works Nos. 463-82/ 581-90), he was untypically content to leave specification, design and construction entirely at the contractor’s discretion and the celebrated “Beyer” class resulted. Expansion of Swindon works obviated the need for further recourse to BP until 1931 when the GWR purchased 25 examples of 0-6-0PT Class 57xx (works Nos. 6680-704) under a government programme for relief of unemployment.

This site remained Beyer Peacock’s home throughout the company’s existence. Business growth necessitated expansion and 10 acres of adjoining land were acquired in 1870. The relationship between Foundry and Tank remained cordial down the years. In 1923, having relinquished their positions with the Great Central Railway, Sir Sam Fay (General Manager) and JG Robinson (Chief Mechanical Engineer) joined the BP board with the former becoming chairman.

The proposal to form a partnership was thus well known in the industry, and the prospects for the venture were regarded favourably by eminent personalities such as Joseph Armstrong, Thomas Brassey, Matthew Kirtley and Archibald Sturrock. Initial capital for the venture was £30,000, a very substantial sum in those days and fund raising was a major hurdle. A substantial loan was provided by Charles Geach who had an active interest in funding new technology. This support was key to purchase of 12 acres of land in Openshaw, Manchester, two miles from the city centre. The site was situated directly to the south of the ‘Gorton Tank’ works of the Manchester Sheffield & Lincolnshire Railway, separated only by that system’s Manchester-Doncaster route. It also enabled construction of the first buildings that would form part of Gorton Foundry.

Beyer had a major impact on construction evolution. His high standards combined with emphasis on design, form and even elegance played major roles in acceptance of how a steam locomotive should appear. At the 1862 International Exhibition (also known as the Great London Exposition) the company displayed 2-2-2 D. Luiz, built for the South Eastern Railway of Portugal to a design similar to that previously supplied to the Edinburgh & Glasgow Railway. Particular care was taken in this engine’s finish for which the sale price was £2,500 against a total production cost of £2,834. A contemporary account praised the full-length frames and the advantages of mounting the cylinders separately.

Manufacturing apparently commenced in the fourth quarter of 1854 but the venture was almost stillborn as Geach died suddenly on 10 November 1854 at the age of 46. His legal representative immediately called in his loan which resulted in a frantic scramble by the partners to make up the shortfall from other sources. 9

Beyer-Garratt

South Eastern Railway of Portugal 5’ 6” gauge 2-2-2 D. Luiz was exhibited at the Great London Exposition in 1862 and received many plaudits for construction quality, frame design and the absence of a dome. The reception given to this locomotive did much to enhance BP’s reputation in the UK and in continental Europe. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Novel features included inside axle boxes for the driving wheels while retaining outside boxes for the carrying wheels, and use of a perforated main steam pipe which obviated the need for a dome. The widespread acclaim which this machine received made the loss on the transaction an acceptable advertising expense.

An obstacle was difficulty in sourcing the machine tools needed for high quality volume manufacture so Beyer started design and manufacture of this equipment. Early examples included heavy lathes (for axle turning), other types of lathe, and grinding machines for slide bars and motion components. This progress was sustained after Beyer’s death with development of a vertical spindle grinding machine with a profiling motion that derived from his early tool designs. There followed a range of single/ double spindle and other grinding machines for locomotive parts that were incapable of production through rotational methods. In addition to locomotive production, the company supplied machine tools to railway builders and other manufacturers. There was also demand for portable tools for use in repair depots, leading to supply of equipment to customers as after sales support.

The company’s formative years saw evolution of the standards and policies that underwrote the ‘corporate culture’, a crucial but hard-to-define element at the core of sustained success. Its early establishment and its resilience served the company well over succeeding decades. As an engineer/ manufacturer, Beyer imposed and expected much of himself, and of his company the highest quality standards.

Beyer Peacock designed and manufactured a range of machine tools for its own production needs, for general industrial use, and for the workshops of the railways to which locomotives were supplied. This is a 4-foot wheel lathe built in 1868. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

People and Patents The final stage in the establishment of the business as a formal corporate entity took place when on 26 April 1883, Beyer, Peacock, and Company Limited was incorporated to take over the business which until then was still a partnership between Peacock and Robertson. Prior to incorporation the partnership had been personally liable for the obligations of the business but the umbrella of limited liability allowed others to share in ownership. Such was the progress thus far that there was no shortage of subscribers. The limited company was fortunate in the managers who joined the enterprise and sustained the standards set by the founders. A complete catalogue is beyond the scope of this work but two individuals were significant in business continuity before HW Garratt arrived at Gorton Foundry.

by the Direct Natal Line. Following a spell as Third Engineer aboard the US Arctic Relief Ship Alert from Gravesend to New York prior to its departure northward, he returned to the railway world as inspecting engineer for Douglas Fox in respect of freight locomotives under construction by Neilson for the Central Argentine Railway. Garratt demonstrated his inventive spirit by taking out Patent No. 139837 for ‘An Improvement in the Expansion of the Valve Gear of Locomotive and other Steam Engines’ in November 1885. Capacity for original thought and creative solutions would stand him in good stead in remote locations where he had to rely on unskilled labour and inadequate machine tools. During 1885/ 6 he worked at Abergavenny

Herman Ludwig Lang (1837-92) The standards instilled by Charles Beyer were sustained after his death by the presence of Herman Lang who had also been born in Plauen, Saxony. He joined BP at Beyer’s invitation in 1862 so apparently they had previously known each other although the background is not recorded. However, he shared Beyer’s attitude and commitment, becoming Chief Draughtsman in 1865. Following the founding partner’s death, he succeeded as Chief Engineer in June 1872 which position he held until his own death twenty years later. This succession was important for design continuity and in fostering the company’s growing reputation for first class products. An example of design ancestry lay in forty-one outside cylinder 2-4-0s (works Nos. 273-313) and eight outside cylinder 4-4-0Ts (works Nos. 314-321) built in 1862 for the Tudela & Bilbao Railway, Spain. They formed the template two years later for the first of the famous 4-4-0Ts for London’s Metropolitan Railway. The inclined cylinders and front bogie recurred in further successful designs, showing that with Beyer’s passing Lang sustained the founder’s practices. Ralph Peacock (1838-1928) Ralph Peacock was the only representative of the next generation to stay with the company. He had joined BP in 1862 and on the death of his father in March 1889, Ralph became Managing Director and then with Lang’s death, he also assumed direct responsibility for design and engineering. He retired from active management in 1902 and there being no other surviving relation of the founders, he oversaw the re-formation of BP as a public company. No longer active in management, he remained on the board until 1905. Ralph Peacock was succeeded by George Dawson who had married his daughter.

Hermann Ludwig Lang (1837-92) The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

but for whom is not recorded, followed by a spell on the London & South Western Railway in connection with the Vacuum Brake Company. In early 1889 and not yet 25 years old, he was appointed as ‘Temporary Head Draughtsman’ with the Central Argentine Railway where he remained until 1897. This posting was apparently one of contentment in an otherwise peripatetic career. He worked hard in a range of duties and despite entitlement to UK leave every three years, apparently his return home was delayed until February 1897 for hospitalisation after a period of ill-health. For personal reasons he delayed his return to duty which resulted in his dismissal, despite recognition that he had done well for the company. Surviving accounts show that his departure was regretted by subordinates who presented him with a gold watch and a testimonial. Also, his superiors apparently recognised his contribution by providing financial

Herbert William Garratt (1864-1913) He was born 6 June 1864 and educated in London, followed by apprenticeship at Bow Works, North London Railway, under JC Park from 1879 to 1882. There he gained experience in several departments and displayed talent as a draughtsman and an artist. He then worked as a fitter with William Doxford’s Marine works at Sunderland and in 1883, went to sea as Fourth Engineer on the SS Umtata and then as Third Engineer on the SS Congella; both vessels were owned 11

Beyer-Garratt compensation. This episode offers a possible insight into his character, suggesting a hard-working engineer and effective leader who could find himself at loggerheads with his superiors. There is a suggestion that employment termination was motivated by more factors than merely the unofficially extended leave.

The year 1900 was also significant in that Herbert Garratt had developed an interest in alternative types of articulated locomotive to overcome the operating difficulties presented by steep gradients, sharp curves and poorly laid trackwork. To this end he maintained a scrapbook of newspaper and technical publications that addressed these and related issues. The earliest cuttings in this collection dated from then.

Back in England, he lodged a preliminary patent application for re-positioning leading sandboxes partly within the smokebox to reduce risk of spillage on the valve motion. The idea was presented to Dübs & Co but proceeded no further. Also, based on his experience in Argentina, he invented an alternative form of spark arrester and an indicator system connected to distant signals and their related point interlocking. The latter idea demonstrated that his innovative skills derived from broad experience beyond locomotive design and operation.

In February 1902, he signed a one year contract with the Lagos Government Railway, Nigeria to re-invigorate the locomotive department which was in parlous condition with only three operating engines and a timetable that had virtually collapsed. Within 12 months, with a small team of Europeans and a contingent of loyal Africans, the complete motive power fleet was restored to good health and the timetable re-established. An example of his effectiveness

Herbert William Garratt standing in front of a 2-6-0 in the yard at Lagos, Nigeria. During his re-organisation of motive power affairs, Garratt and a small team steamed a 2-6-0 within 32 hours of its delivery in component form and this could have been the locomotive in question. The West African climate was notorious for Europeans in the 1900s and Garratt had already suffered ill-health leading to hospitalisation while working in South America. He was ill again during or shortly after his Lagos posting which more than likely included bouts of malaria. This poor health record doubtless contributed to his early passing.

In 1900, Garratt was appointed Locomotive Superintendent of the Cuban Central Railways where he successfully reorganised the workshops and was popular with the workforce. However, he strongly disagreed with the General Manager’s decision to demote a capable Spanish foreman and replace him with a newly qualified, inexperienced Englishman. Garratt’s judgement was later proved correct but by then he had resigned, again to the regret of the rankand-file.

was a new 2-6-0 delivered in component form which was in steam 32 hours later. He wrote a full report on his reorganisation with recommendations on how to reduce costs but then the pattern was repeated. His contract was extended for only three months, and then terminated. It might be surmised that his continued presence was unwelcome among those elements that had allowed the deterioration to set in prior to his arrival. Ominously, he suffered another bout of ill-health during or shortly after this posting. 12

People and Patents Herbert Garratt’s final foreign sojourn commenced in 1904 with Lima Railways in Peru as Resident Engineer and Locomotive Superintendent. He reorganised the workshops and achieved significant savings while also handling a contentious strike that earned him special thanks from his superiors. Unfortunately, the company was the subject of a takeover bid and with electrification imminent, Garratt found himself declared redundant; the company paid his first-class passage back to England in April 1905. It this thought that he met the lady who was to be his wife during this period.

Perhaps he had yet to hone his ideas into a saleable proposition, or perhaps the company was too busy with the Kitson-Meyer, or perhaps the potential gain in boiler capacity was considered too marginal. Whatever the reasons, his approach received short shrift based on comments in the official Kitson history: ‘In 1907, Mr HW Garratt called Airedale Foundry to submit his patent for articulation. I have said elsewhere that in those early days there was not much reticence as to mechanical opinion. Kitsons expressed a decided lack of enthusiasm for another engineer’s “damned improvements” and the idea was not taken up ….’. The consequences of this decision might be judged by the later history of articulated construction.

There followed a difficult spell of unemployment while living in Richmond. Surrey. Aged 41 years he had a wealth of practical experience but was newly married and without regular income. With a possible reputation on the senior management grapevine for being competent but ‘difficult’, there could have been intensive soul-searching concerning his future. He seemingly compensated by focussing his energies in building a live steam 4-4-0 to 2¾” scale. He also addressed the challenge of creating full-size locomotives able to haul heavy loads over sub-standard trackwork through mountainous terrain. Much of his time was devoted to devising possible solutions, culminating in a preliminary patent application dated 26 July 1907.

Seventy-eight Kitson-Meyers were built between 1894 and 1935, mainly for South America. The company went into receivership in 1934 and ended locomotive construction in 1938. By comparison, BP delivered 130 Garratts between 1908 and 1926, and survived as an independent entity until the 1960s. Herbert Garratt’s personal prospects improved when on 7 August 1907 he was engaged as Inspecting Engineer by New South Wales Government Railways for three orders under construction at Gorton as summerised below:

Patents The opening words of the provisional specification: ‘The principal object being to admit of a combination of an extremely large boiler combined with any required size of wheels and a low centre of gravity’. This implies boiler size as the key criterion combined with wide design variation for a multiplicity of duties; low centre of gravity fell away as the type’s excellent riding characteristics became evident. These factors suggest intentions quite different from those behind Fairlies and Meyers which were then the only prominent articulated types plus the semi-articulated Mallet. Their relevant features are considered in Chapter 5.

Designed in collaboration with NSWGR, these were repeat orders, well-built in the BP tradition, much respected by the operator, and long-lived. However, the concluding batches of all three types were built by NSWGR and Australian commercial manufacturers. In 1912, 2-8-0 Class TF-939 entered traffic as a development of the earlier BP 2-8-0 and all 190 of the later class were built in Australia, proving that local manufacture had come of age. Apart from a pair of 0-4-2 crane tanks in 1909, no further rigid-framed locomotives of BP design were purchased and this operator only returned to Gorton for supply of the redoubtable 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD60 in 1952. This metamorphosis was evident in other markets in the first decade of the 20th Century, most noticeably in the decline of custom from the Far East as exemplified with the Nippon Railway (Japanese Government Railways from 1906).

Herbert Garratt commenced his search for a commercial sponsor for his ideas by approaching Kitson & Co of Leeds, then the UK’s leading producer of articulated locomotives. His career history suggests that he was unlikely to have worked directly with either the Meyer type or the KitsonMeyer derivative, but was probably familiar with both through their popularity in South America. Despite certain shortcomings, the Meyer type then offered the best means of mounting a larger boiler and firebox on an articulated chassis.

With concern over declining sales opportunities, Garratt’s appointment in connection with the NSWGR contract was timely. He had gained a foot-in-the-door at Gorton, and access to the drawing office which avoided repetition of a Kitson-like reception. However, although highly regarded for quality, the company’s experience with articulated power was slight. A pair of ‘Twin Tank’ 2-6-0T locomotives (subject to Lange and H. Livesey’s patent) which were conventional 13

Beyer-Garratt

NSWGR Class S-636 4-6-4T - Nswptc

NSWGR Class T-524 2-8-0 - John Adamson

NSWGR Class P-6 4-6-0. - Leon Oburg

Herbert Garratt came in contact with Beyer Peacock through his appointment as Inspecting Engineer on behalf of New South Wales Government Railways which had placed orders for examples of these three classes. The original design work had been undertaken by BP in collaboration with NSWGR. All three types were well regarded in service, but later examples were built by the operator and commercial Australian manufacturers. No further orders of significance were placed by NSWGR with BP until those for 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD60 Garratts after World War 2. Despite product quality, the Great Western Railway had ceased trading with BP in 1864 as had Nippon Railways in the early 1900s. This was typical as operators developed their own workshop and construction facilities. There must have been perpetual concern about when and where the next contract would be secured, and whether the forward order book could remain filled. With BP’s uncertainty over future business sources and Herbert Garratt’s concern for future employment, the two parties’ encounter of 1907 was probably aided by mutual need.

People and Patents locomotives permanently coupled cab-to-cab, had been supplied to the Inter-Oceanic Railway, Mexico in 1889. Fairlies had been designed but not built in the 1890s for South America and Burma. A similar fate befell proposed Mallets for Portugal in 1904 and Chile in 1906. Customer interest in articulated power was prevalent in 1907 in the form of two versions of a 2’ gauge Mallet for Tasmanian Government Railways and a 2’ gauge Double Fairlie for New South Wales Government Railway. The drawing for the latter contemplated a single firebox door, a fault that had been recognised in Double-Fairlies many years earlier and which probably reflected BP’s then lack of experience in articulated designs.

To Alcock’s evident disapproval ‘… he did not come in every day while his design was being worked out, but only for two or three hours a day twice or thrice a week. Nevertheless, works and drawing office combined to get the idea into a workman like shape…’ Garratt was self-employed, free to work as he pleased, and probably content to allow drawing office staff independently to validate his idea. Alcock described him as tall, bearded and ‘not always strictly addicted to temperance’. It seems that the pair did not ‘get on’! Alcock’s account has been regarded by some as historically important, suggesting that Garratt’s contribution was superficial and that real progress was at the behest of BP’s drawing office personnel. It concludes with the selfcongratulatory remark ‘…the first two orders turned out quite successfully – particularly when one remembers the physical configuration of the two lines involved.’

Herbert Garratt lodged his preliminary patent application in July 1907, only a few days before he started work for NSWGR. The confluence of dates seems unlikely to have been coincidental. With ‘live’ enquiries for articulated power under consideration in the Gorton drawing office, he might have recognised an unrepeatable opportunity and moved swiftly to inaugurate patent protection of his idea. The NSWGR Fairlie proposal was eventually formalised as a larger version (for 2’ 6” gauge) but proceeded no further; the Tasmanian Mallet was discarded in favour of the Garratt proposal. However, the latter adopted the wheel arrangement, wheel diameter and cylinder dimensions that had been chosen for the first NSWGR Fairlie in its original design form.

However, Herbert Garratt’s contribution was more tangible than a rough sketch. He delivered blueprints and engineering drawings at the start of October 1907, and he moved his family to Levenshulme, Manchester to work more closely on the project. Vital to the exercise’s cohesion, Samuel Jackson led the team that validated and refined Garratt’s preliminary work. Jackson, had been a premium apprentice (1896-1900) under Webb at Crewe during which period he had won several prizes at Stockport Technical School. He was Assistant Works Manager at Gorton from 1913, Works Manager (1918-1924) and Chief Designer (1925-1943). At the time of his sudden death in June 1943 he was Works Director. He was a brilliant engineer and the ‘go to man’ for development of fresh ideas as exemplified by the Mallet exercises mentioned above and his later role in the BeyerLjungström steam turbine project. He was synonymous with Garratt evolution up to the 1940s but with a dictatorial management style, he found it hard to delegate. This trait has been attributed in large measure to his passing at a time when pressures exerted upon the works were unprecedented.

Garratt’s experience had fully exposed him to the core problems associated with working heavy loads over long distances through difficult territory. These conditions differed markedly from the UK where well-capitalised investment in tunnels, embankments, valley and river crossings had yielded modest gradients and excellent alignments. He had spotted the kernel of the solution and a version of how the project advanced was provided by Edgar Alcock, a BP employee (as reported by LTC Rolt in A Hunslet Hundred, David & Charles 1964). Garratt presented his idea to Henry A Hoy, the talented mechanical and electrical engineer who was BP’s General Manager from 1904 until his premature death in 1910 (he had previously been CME of the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway). Hoy thought the idea had merit and passed it to AC Rogerson, Works Manager, another ex-LYR employee and later BP’s General Manager [1919-21]. The aforementioned Alcock was deputed to keep in close touch with Herbert Garratt, and to provide whatever assistance he might require.

The UK patent for which Garratt had made preliminary application was issued in June 1908 for a 15-year term. The sequence of recorded dates suggests that applications were lodged more or less concurrently in overseas jurisdictions and details of the protection secured were: (see overleaf). It is believed that an application was also lodged in Australia but details have not been traced. Herbert Garratt and BP shared the registration expenses for these patents.

Alcock described Garratt as having brought only the ‘bare idea’ in the form of a ‘rough sketch’, based on having watched a long bogie wagon move over reverse curves in a yard and wondering whether a locomotive could not be built on the same principle. This suggests a cautious approach by disclosing minimal intellectual property early in negotiations while using a convenient simile to illustrate the proposed articulation method. Alcock seemed to miss these points in disparagingly describing Garratt’s presentation.

The Great War delayed development and construction for around five years so a matching extension was sought in the UK which was granted for an extra 4½ years to January 1928. Most significantly, a three-year extension was also agreed for the German patent which thus expired in mid-1926 but similar applications were declined in Italy and India. The patents for Canada and USA were fixed for 18 and 17 years respectively and governing legislation prevented 15

Beyer-Garratt Garratt is thought to have paid the related registration fees for UK and overseas which would have been logical as he retained sole ownership of the relative patents. Once the agreement had been signed, BP proceeded to conclude manufacturing licencing arrangements with Baldwin Locomotive Co (USA), Henschel & Sohn (Germany), and Société St Leonard of Liege (Belgium). If others had shared Alcock’s views on the value of Herbert Garratt’s contribution, there might have been an argument that Jackson was the man who gave the concept its commercial feasibility. Although the preliminary patent application pre-dated the association with BP, a less scrupulous organisation might have found ways to exclude Garratt from the project’s advancement. There is no suggestion that any such behaviour was contemplated, underlining the enduring nature of the company’s moral integrity as injected by its founding partners.

prolongation. Continuation of the UK patent was particularly important as the hiatus caused by the conflict and the subsequent delay in re-energising sales momentum would have exposed the concept to premature competition before BP could consolidate its market position. The extension to the German patent proved important with escalating demand in South Africa, as described in Chapter 5.

Meanwhile, a problem over drawings arose with the Consulting Engineer over the NSWGR contract and Garratt resigned as Inspecting Engineer on 31 August 1908. This was probably inevitable as he was prima facie by then in a conflict of interest. Thereafter he focussed his efforts on stimulating Garratt locomotive sales. He also worked on application of his principle of articulation to create a carriage suitable for a railway-borne large bore field artillery gun but

A formal agreement between Herbert Garratt and BP was proposed on 31 July 1908 and signed on 18 September.

Once terms of the association had been agreed, patents duly registered at home and overseas, and production underway, Herbert Garratt commenced sales promotion as exemplified by his letterhead. He evidently exercised his talents as an artist with the illustration of a sturdy 0-6-0+0-6-0 heading a freight train through mountainous country and tackling a 1 in 25 gradient. BP only built one six-coupled maximum adhesion type – a tramway design substantially smaller than that depicted. The advantages of carrying axles were recognised in early design exercises.

People and Patents this exercise was apparently never concluded. While living at Levenshulme, Garratt established a workshop and an office at his home.

However much Alcock sought to disparage the value of Herbert Garratt’s contribution, it was undeniable that the latter’s experience had been earned at the ‘sharp end’ and mentally far removed from the ‘ivory tower’ of drawing office and factory. It is contended that this influence helped the swift acceptance of the Garratt type in diverse circumstances prior to World War 1, and that the contribution of Cyril Williams (discussed next) as his natural successor was essential to post-war progress.

He painted the illustration which depicts a sturdy 0-6-0+0-60 hard at work on a freight train assaulting a 1 in 25 gradient in mountainous territory. This possibly indicates how he envisioned development of his idea although BP built only two locomotives to this wheel arrangement; they were the smallest Garratts produced by the company. In 1911, he moved with his family to Ellerker Gardens, Richmond, Surrey. By then, sales were under way and the move facilitated contact with London-based representatives of overseas railways.

Nevertheless, Herbert Garratt’s creative practically-derived approach to engineering challenges had come at a cost. Prophylactic measures against the ravages of tropical diseases were still in their infancy and combined with the hostile climate, service in Nigeria was particularly tough on Europeans. Apparently having suffered increasingly fragile health, he passed away on 25 September 1913 aged 49 years. This was before he could have had any inkling of the enormous impact his invention would have internationally. At least enough engines had been built by then for him to know that his brainchild was gathering momentum.

Once again his letterhead was decorated with a Garratt illustration, in this case based on a real example – the eight-cylinder 4-4-2+2-4-4 Class M of Tasmanian Government Railways. Herbert appears to have been active in this period, as typified by his visit in 1911 to Société St Leonard to study trials with a 750 mm gauge 0-6-0+0-6-0 that had been built for tramway service in the Belgian Congo. This was the first oil-burning Garratt and was fitted with an experimental boiler design that was not repeated. Tiny preWorld War 1 tramway Garratts built in Belgium were, rather ironically, the first to operate in Africa, the continent that would become synonymous with the giants of the genre.

Mrs Garratt was executrix and beneficiary of Herbert’s Will whereby she inherited the patent rights. BP handled subsequent registrations and charged for these services by deductions from royalty income which was calculated as £2 per ton on every locomotive constructed although later modified to £2 per ton for the first 120 tons and £1

Garratt moved to his last home at Richmond, Surrey in 1911. Close proximity to the capital where many foreign companies maintained UK representation made this a more convenient base from which to mount his promotional efforts. An ornate illustrated letterhead was again employed, this time depicting an actual design that had entered operational service – the remarkable eight-cylinder double-Atlantic Tasmanian Government Railways Class M. This design was totally atypical of how the Garratt would evolve but it must have provided an attention-grabbing talking point.

Beyer-Garratt Born in South Africa in 1890, he joined Natal Government Railways in 1906 as an apprentice, and gained experience in engineering workshops, running sheds, drawing office, signalling department, and footplate work while winning several prizes at Durban Technical Institute. In 1913 he joined the staff of the Chief Motive Power Superintendent, Johannesburg as a junior engineer, followed by service on military railway duties in South-West Africa and then France. From 1919 until 1921 he was an inspecting engineer for South African Railways in north America, and then in London before joining the staff of the Assistant General Manager, Durban with responsibility for locomotive testing. He played a key in the comparative trials conducted during 1921 to which SAR’s first Cape Gauge Garratt was subjected against a Mallet and a rigid-framed locomotive, as described

Garratts must have come under close physical scrutiny by competing manufacturers seeking to replicate the format and this works plate, carried by Rhodesian Railways 2-8-2+2-8-2 16th Class No. 225, provides evidence of the efforts employed to defend the product. HW Garratt’s patent number is prominent but it had expired the previous year, as had similar measures in other jurisdictions. The company had then differentiated the type from imitations by restyling its product as the ‘Beyer-Garratt’. The other patent numbers quoted covered innovations introduced subsequently to protect refinements to component parts. The words ‘and patents pending’ gave notice that the process of innovation and development was continuing. The message is plain that the company took the matter of legal protection extremely seriously. In other words ‘Keep off the grass’.

per ton thereafter. BP also deducted 10% commission to cover design and other charges. This had been Herbert’s sole income source in his final years and in turn that of his widow. With no sales between 1915 and 1919, Mrs Garratt was supported by advances from BP against future royalties. By the mid-1920s, she was receiving significant income from the patent. That for 1927 totalled £5,951, a substantial sum for those times. Expiry of the original UK patent saw a change in the pattern of demand and supply. In the period 1927-30 at a time when Gorton Foundry was working at full capacity, German manufacturers seized the opportunity to meet burgeoning appetite in South Africa by studying BP’s drawings and by aggressive price discounting. BP’s response was to relabel its product as the ‘Beyer-Garratt’ and to protect its market position by patents over later innovations. The first of these (dated 1928) related to a new form of adjustable pivot first applied to the New Zealand Garratts which were delivered in early 1929. Further protection was provided by a rigorously administered regime of licencing arrangements (see Appendix C).

W. Cyril Williams The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review in Chapter 5 ‘Beyer-Garratt versus the rest’. Williams personally supervised the first tests and the results gave rise to his unequivocal enthusiasm for the type, only for his views to be rejected by his superiors. More trials followed but official acceptance had become a contentious issue that took time to resolve.

W. Cyril Williams (1890-1959) Despite promising pre-war sales, product quality and the invention’s brilliance would be insufficient to sustain progress against competitive forces in the 1920s. Effective marketing and resultant sales expansion needed a powerful stimulus. This came in the form of Cyril Williams who became known respectfully and affectionately throughout the industry as ‘Garratt-Williams’.

Most importantly, Williams had grasped the concept’s global potential beyond parochial debate in South Africa and then demonstrated his commitment though independent action. The dates are unclear but he visited London privately in 1922, probably after the retirement of Hendrie (CME) and 18

People and Patents

This remarkable diagram was published in the article titled ‘The Advantages of Articulated Locomotives” which appeared in the Railway Gazette for 4 August 1922. Garratts with the 4-8-2+2-8-4 wheel arrangement would ultimately become the most numerous to be built by the company but the early date of this illustration reflects the bold and advanced thinking that Cyril Williams had adopted.

called on John Kay, Editor of The Railway Gazette, to impart the message that he wanted to sell Garratts. Presumably having identified his target in advance, his aim was superb as through his extensive industry contacts, Kay arranged an introduction to Beyer Peacock which led to his appointment as the London representative of the company.

progression of Herbert Garratt’s groundwork, born of varied operational experience in challenging situations. Williams was a first-class promoter, wholeheartedly devoted to the steam locomotive’s cause, and with total faith in the product. He strove for impartiality in comparing the relative merits of Garratts, Mallets and Kitson-Meyers, and by employing fact-based information was usually persuasive concerning the Gorton product’s advantages. As with all competent salesmen, he strove fully to understand customer needs, and thereby offer realistic solutions. He travelled extensively to seek new opportunities, to ride on Garratts under varying conditions, and to provide post-sales support. The role of international sales manager sounds glamorous but the task can be gruelling, frustrating, and sometimes hazardous. In Williams’s time, challenges were exacerbated by primitive international communications, long periods at sea, sometimes slow and difficult overland travel, and indifferent accommodation. His reports on extended sales visits to South America and Africa as summarised in Chapter 3 provide an inkling of the obstacles he encountered.

A by-product of the encounter with Kay was the publication of an article entitled “The Advantages of Articulated Locomotives” in The Railway Gazette for 4 August 1922, which was subsequently distributed in brochure form for promotional purposes. This drew heavily upon the results of the South African trials, supported by side elevation photographs and boiler dimensions which described the key differences between Garratt Class GA and Mallet Class MH. An interesting aspect of this publication was a diagram showing a proposed 4-8-2+2-8-4 for South Africa. The prescient nature of this illustration is remarkable in portraying a wheel arrangement that first took physical form in 1926 and which would ultimately account for 44% of Gorton Foundry’s total Garratt production. The proposal’s overall wheelbase was 81’ 7” compared with 79’ 5” over couplers for the MH including tender so that by contemporary standards, Williams’s idea must have appeared enormous. Having agreed his future appointment with BP, he returned to South Africa and continued as an SAR employee before resignation under amicable circumstances in the last quarter of 1922. Fragments of correspondence with BP from the second half of 1922 show that he was actively reporting to Gorton on developments and teething problems which might have risked issues of divided loyalties. He started work proper for BP with effect from 1 January 1923 and initiated his sales activities by calls on railway companies during his journey to London. This was a logical

Sir Sam Fay (1856-1953) By happy co-incidence, Sir Sam Fay had relinquished his position as General Manager of the Great Central Railway at the end of 1922 following the Grouping. He assumed the chairmanship of BP in early 1923 and resigned from the board in 1933. Fay was a career railwayman who had started as a junior clerk aged 15 years with the London & South Western Railway in 1872. He rose to become Chief Clerk in 1885 followed by Assistant Storekeeper at Nine Elms six years later. The following year he was seconded as General Manager & Secretary of the Midland & South Western Junction Railway Ltd (in receivership). He restored 19

Beyer-Garratt The period from 1934 onwards is known as the ‘Wilmot Era’, first in the painfully slow process of economic recovery, and then the disruption and intense demands exerted by the war. Thereafter, unprecedented order levels for new locomotives characterised the peacetime recovery phase. Then as business tailed away, the spectre of steam’s global redundancy arose and with it, the urgent search for replacement activities. As Managing Director from 1938 until 1960 and Chairman from 1949, Wilmot led the company through these turbulent times with determination and competence. He travelled widely in pursuit of business and was a prominent participant in several professional bodies. He retired in 1965 when the independent life of the company he had led so forcefully was drawing to a close and he passed away the following year.

Sir Sam Fay, Chairman from 1923 until 1933.

that company to sound financial health and completed a missing link in its main line. This success brought him to the notice of the Lord Faringdon, Chairman of the GCR and Fay was appointed General Manager with effect from January 1902. His years with the GCR were successful in multifacetted development and in improving the company’s faltering financial condition that existed at the start of the century. Visionary, decisive, commercially accomplished, his energetic approach was well-suited to BP’s expansionist posture and it is easy to understand how Cyril Williams would have blended with Fay’s progressive nature. Harold Wilmot (1895-1966) After army service in World War 1, he undertook an apprenticeship with Charles McNeil & Co Ltd, Glasgow (manufacturers of specialised engineering products, forgings and castings) and then joined BP as Cost Accountant in 1924, followed by elevation to Chief Accountant in 1930 and then ‘Comptroller’ (evidently a more broadly based administrative function). This background in finance was invaluable for his promotion to General Manager in 1934 as BP’s survival was then under threat; that year the company sold only six locomotives. At the end of the previous year the entire workforce except four management members (Messrs, Jackson, Williams, Wilmot and Welsh) had been served with precautionary notice of employment termination, with the works reduced to functioning on a ‘caretaker’ basis.

Harold Wilmot Harold Wilmot joined the company in 1924 as Cost Accountant, became Chief Accountant in 1930 and General Manager in 1934. He steered the company with determination out of the worst of the Great Depression. As Managing Director from 1938 until 1960, he led the company through the challenges and unprecedented demands imposed by World War 2 followed by intense demand in peacetime that progressively melted away with steam’s demise. He was also Chairman from 1949 until 1965 by which time BP’s days were definitely numbered. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Senior executives, Summer 1928. Standing (L to R): PE Croucher, Buyer; PA Creeke, Plant Superintendent; J Smith, Labour and Welfare Supervisor; J Pimm, Chief Draughtsman Sitting: EF Lang, Metallurgist; S Jackson, Chief Designer & Works Manager; RH Whitelegg, General Manager; H Wilmot, Chief Accountant; R Welsh, Secretary; F Wilde, Works Superintendent The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

People and Patents

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing office at Gorton. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Gorton Foundry – the means by which ‘Foundry’ was distinguished from the other Gorton across the railway line at ‘Tank’. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Part of Gorton Foundry’s Erecting Shop The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Members of Kenya Uganda Railway 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class EC3 in the erecting shop. Science Museum

The sign above the railway line on the building’s side states ‘BEYER PEACOCK & Co LIMITED LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS & MACHINISTS’. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Group view of company senior personnel and executives at Gorton in 1952. The backdrop is formed by NSWGR 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD60 No.6015 (Order No. 11155). The company was intensely busy at the time in meeting demand for large Garratts in unprecedented numbers. The more reflective of those present would have been wondering for how much longer the good times would last.

People and Patents

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 2 : Design and manufacture

hen Herbert Garratt started his appointment as Inspecting Engineer for New South Wales Government Railway, Beyer Peacock was already probing the potential for supply of articulated locomotives. During the 1890s the company had prepared four different proposals for Double Fairlies (three of which were compounds) but no orders resulted. A ‘modified’ Fairliestyle locomotive with two independent boilers was also prepared for, but not adopted by, Burma Railways. In the new century, revived interest in articulation took shape in three Mallet designs, two for the Portuguese State Railway

in 1904 and one for the Arica Railway, Chile in 1906. As mentioned in Chapter 1, when Herbert Garratt started at Gorton, two 2’ 0” Mallet designs had been submitted to Tasmanian Government Railways and more or less concurrently, a 2’ 6” gauge Fairlie design for New South Wales Government Railway. These exercises contrasted with conventional rigidframed types that had been staple fare since creation of the partnership. Sales aspirations were mainly focussed on larger machines but trading patterns were erratic, as

Gorton’s first essay into articulation comprised two pairs of back-to-back 2-6-0Ts numbered 27+27A and 28+28A (works Nos. 3012-5) supplied to Ferro Carril Interoceanico in 1889. These were the only locomotives built under a patent held by Messrs Lang and Livesey, and the only locomotives of any type sold by BP to a Mexican operator. The pairs were connected by a drawbar which was accommodated by raising the firebox floor and were timber burners although where the fuel was stored is unclear. They were of conventional design and the patent referred to the coupling of the driving controls by means of an overhead shaft so that the regulators worked simultaneously. The intention was to create a flexible, powerful double locomotive with low axle loading but the type was not repeated. Numbered 11-14, they operated solus in later years. Nos 11, 12 & 14 were withdrawn by 1913 and No. 13 survived until 1920.

In 1905 BP entered the Steam Rail Motor market with sales to three operators. Photographic evidence shows that BP supplied a standard design with engine unit, cab, tank and bunker supported by an 0-2-2T wheel arrangement with pivoted connection to the coach floor. BP also provided the coach bogie, chassis, brake and draw gear etc leaving provision of the coach body to a third party builder. This photograph shows one of three sold to United Railways of Havana, Cuba. The concept enjoyed short-lived popularity but after 1905 no more examples were sold despite several attempts.

Design and manufacture Left. An attempt to enter the road freight sector with steam-powered road lorries was mounted in the early 1900s when demand for railway locomotives appeared to be weakening. This example’s side sheets, handrails, lamp iron etc displayed a distinct locomotive ambience. It seems to have been hired or sold to an independent contractor or operator.

unquantifiable source of competition. Other motive power manufacturers were assessing opportunities for construction of electric traction. Product diversification was desirable when traditional forms of the steam locomotive were reaching feasible size limits in some regions. Eight steam rail motors with 0-2-2T power units were sold in 1905: North Staffordshire Railway [three - works Nos. 4643/ 4/ 793]; United Railways of Havana, Cuba [three - works Nos. 4659-61]; London Brighton & South Coast Railway [two - works Nos. 4721/ 2]. The 35’ long coach bodies were supplied by outside contractors while BP built the locomotive section and the complete chassis up to floor level in what was apparently a standard design. There were several unsuccessful attempts at further sales but the concept enjoyed only limited and short-term market appeal. In the Garratt context, their interest lay in the inboard positioning of the cylinders (as with Tasmanian Government Railways Class K) and the uncomfortable ride imparted to the coach section which was This BP steam lorry of 1906 vintage presented a more sophisticated an early revelation of issues concerning appearance with cab, disk wheels, and a splendid chimney. This appears pivot design. to have been the last attempt to build road vehicles.

Expansion into petrol-powered road transport was investigated but re-tooling costs were judged excessive. Nevertheless, around six steam-powered lorries (‘lurries’ in BP parlance) were constructed. They used a novel boiler patented by Hoy and apparently served BP’s own needs although at least one seems to have been hired or sold to a third party. In 1907 an 0-4-0T fitted with a ‘Brotan’ boiler was built for The British Mannesmann Tube Co Ltd. This system combined a stay-less water tube firebox with a conventional lower fire-tube boiler surmounted by a horizontal cylindrical drum that collected steam. There were several applications in Germany, Austria and Hungary but this was the only example in the UK and the first use of a water-tube boiler in this country. Two 0-6-0 crane tanks were supplied to Argentina in 1908. Business of this nature offered insufficient income potential to stem erosion of traditional custom. There was thus powerful commercial incentive to explore new product avenues which embraced articulated steam power.

exemplified by the Barranquilla Railway & Pier Company of Colombia (a country that was never a significant market for BP). Four small 2-4-0Ts were supplied between 1870 and 1874, then a 2-6-0 (works No. 4593) in 1904 and another (works No. 5823) in 1914, both based on a type first supplied (works No. 2509) to Tasmanian Government Railways in 1884. Such fragmentation, typical of overseas custom, fostered uncertainty over the sources of future sales orders and militated against scale economies in production. Further, the trend among major customers to develop in-house manufacturing capacity was a growing threat. Communication delays and shipping costs detracted from reliance on a supplier thousands of miles distant, notwithstanding acknowledged product quality and previous buyer satisfaction. The re-formation of Beyer Peacock as a public company in 1902 took place at an uncertain time. Improving reliability of road vehicles powered by internal combustion engines presented a 25

Beyer-Garratt

This 0-4-0T was built in 1907 and fitted with a Brotan boiler, the only UK-built examples of a system that was used to some extent in Germany, Austria and Hungary.

The Garratt Opportunity The extensive yet incomplete list of designs proposed, patented and sometimes built appearing in Appendix A indicates widespread search for viable forms of articulation over the years. Ingenious ideas sought enhancement in

power transmission by increasing the number of driven axles but worthwhile improvement over rigid-framed reciprocating locomotives was hard to achieve. The comparative inefficiency of the external combustion engine derives from energy loss between its generation

This well-known drawing was one of several design exercises drawn up in the early days of the Garratt project and was apparently based upon the chassis of 0-8-0 Great Central Railway Class 8A. The minimal overhang was a contributing factor to superior riding qualities as compared with contemporary Mallets.

Design and manufacture in the firebox and its application at the cylinder. Complex mechanics thereafter absorb further energy rather than restore anything to that which had been already lost.

apparently overlooked. Adoption of simple expansion for the second (Darjeeling) design set the pattern for all future Garratts except for the solitary compound Burma Railways 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class GA II of 1924 which copied the Tasmanian steam circuit and definitively confirmed that no appreciable advantage resulted.

The Garratt’s transmission adopted the form used in rigidframed machines and in that sense was entirely conventional as with the 31 locomotives ordered pre-World War 1. The Mogyana Railway in Brazil, an established BP customer for 4-6-0 locomotives, purchased two 4-6-0+0-6-4 Garratts in 1912 whose power bogie dimensions closely followed those of the earlier machines. They were effectively a pair of backto-back 4-6-0 chassis that supported a large boiler slung between. New Zealand Railways 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class G of the late 1920s reversed this process when the power bogies of three unsuccessful Garratts were uniquely recycled to create six rigid-framed Pacifics. These cases highlight the fusion of proven construction techniques. It was the core simplicity of Herbert Garratt’s idea that made the initial patent so critically important in establishing and preserving Beyer Peacock’s dominant role in the concept.

The possible deleterious impact of long steam passages was investigated with South African Railways Class GEA 4-8-2+2-8-4 introduced in 1945. These engines were fitted with gauges that indicated prevailing steam chest pressures on the forward and trailing power bogies. No pressure differences were evident between the two units and when climbing long banks, no fall in pressure was detected except in extreme circumstances where a drop of 3-5 lb could occur concurrently on both bogies. In 1912, the 3’ 6” gauge Tasmanian 4-4-2+2-4-4 Class M demonstrated the type’s operational flexibility by working express trains up to 55 mph. In contrast, the high reciprocating mass of the articulated lead unit of the contemporary classic Mallet adversely affected stability at speeds above about 25 mph. Simple expansion Mallets, following substantial modification to springing arrangements, eventually enabled safe higher speeds e.g. the Union Pacific 4-6-6-4 Challengers could run in excess of 60 mph but almost a quarter of a century after the Tasmanian venture.

Simplicity bestowed another advantage of which Herbert Garratt, and later Cyril Williams, would have been conscious, and of which UK-orientated engineers at Gorton might have failed fully to appreciate. Overseas territories often presented challenges for large locomotives outside the parochial UK context. With manufacturer far distant, shortage of skilled labour, and minimal heavy engineering facilities to hand, problem solving demanded application of creativity and flexibility ‘on the hoof’. Those who could cope in those circumstances were a rare breed and Herbert, who had assembled a 2-6-0 in less than two days in Lagos, would readily have understood the scale of the tribulations encountered in 1929 with three Garratts shipped to the Guayaquil & Quito Railway, Ecuador. As was normal, they were delivered in component parts and then shipped by lighters across a river estuary to the operator’s railhead. During this short voyage, a boiler fell overboard and had to be recovered from a depth of 36 feet. On reaching the railhead, the 120-ton locomotives were assembled using only jacks and timber packing, there being no available crane. Turning to individual aspects of the Garratt concept:

More significant than compound steam was superheating which pre-war relied on the Schmidt type. It is unclear what type was used from the 1920s onwards but after some dispute with Schmidt interests, the Superheater Company emerged as the major manufacturer and is likely to have been the main supplier. Few saturated Garratts were built:

1. The boiler 1.1 Compound steam and superheating The first Garratt was a compound which followed the classic Mallet formula where high pressure steam passed direct to the rear engine unit, and then to the low pressure forward unit. Jackson might have been influenced in this choice through his work in 1904-6 on the three prospective Mallet designs, and possibly motivated by concern that long steam pipes to and from the rear cylinders might act as condensers. This would have encouraged inboard cylinders on the power bogies to reduce passage length. The alternative of a HP and LP cylinder on each power bogie was

Little was at stake with the gauge 3’ 0” and narrower designs while the sturdy Vivian engines’ deployment on short distance work made superheating unnecessary. The WAGR and Mogyana types were soon followed by superheated versions. The 1936 São Paulo engine was a copy of its older companion which was judged so satisfactory as to make it unnecessary to adopt design advances achieved in the intervening 24 years. Significant in a negative sense was the Ottoman Railway 2-8-0+0-8-2 of 1927. This company’s anachronistic 27

Beyer-Garratt Boilers that demonstrated the short, wide-girth barrels and the generous firebox proportions that typified the Garratt: A B C D

Iranian State Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 introduced 1939. South African Railways 4-8-4+2-84 Class GEA – 1945. New South Wales Government Railways 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD 60 – 1953 East African Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 59 – 1955

insistence on saturated steam and slide valves was incompatible with a machine that weighed 140 tons and generated a nominal tractive effort exceeding 42,000 lb. As a general rule of thumb, a correctly proportioned superheater could reduce fuel consumption by up to 25%; this engine’s lacklustre performance was unfortunate at a time when international awareness was growing over what a competent eight-coupled modern Garratt could deliver. This unlucky engine survived its operator’s absorption by the Turkish State Railway by only a short period and its poor reputation might well have stymied further sales opportunities in a country whose terrain was ideal for Garratts. 1.2 Steam pipe and couplings A key challenge for the articulated locomotive is the connection between the main steam pipe which is anchored to the boiler superstructure and the cylinders mounted on the power bogie. This had been solved in 1869 by Alexander McDonnell (Great Southern & Western Railway, Ireland) with the world’s first Single Fairlies which were built at Inchicore. Use of minimal anchorages allowed the two main steam pipes either side of the boiler to flex sufficiently to accommodate lateral bogie movement. The arrangement worked well for 20 years but was impracticable for typical Garratt operating conditions elsewhere. First attempts at Gorton to produce a steamtight flexible coupling were unsuccessful and the search for a suitable joint tested Samuel Jackson’s brilliance to the full. Then desk research, apparently by Edgar Alcock, suggested that the answer might lie with the Double Fairlie, the only readily available examples of which were on the Festiniog Railway. A visit to Boston Lodge and study of Fairlies at work resulted in a viable live-steam metal-on-metal spherical joint and this design became standard for all Garratts. Alcock’s account is the only record of this exercise (for example, the seminal work by RF Hills & D Patrick is silent how the design evolved). Alcock apparently visited Wales with a colleague and while no dates are 28

Design and manufacture

The boiler unit for LNER 2-8-0+0-8-2 No. 2295 virtually complete in 1925. This locomotive was unusual in habitually recording severe steam pressure loss after two miles of banking work in partnership with a conventional 2-8-0. The fault probably lay in excessive cylinder capacity rather than any inherent fault in the boiler design. Left. The design of steam pipe ball joint introduced with the first Garratts remained unchanged, except for dimensions. These are the components for an exhaust steam pipe joint used in a post-war derivation of the 4-8-2+2-8-4 STALIG type.

lubricated three (later four) point spring-loaded covering was self-adjusting for wear. Similar principles were used for the exhaust steam joint. The Garratt configuration necessitated long steam pipes and effective expansion joints. These features evolved through different forms from inefficient asbestos glandular packing eventually to finely-engineered specialist packing rings. These were spring-loaded against stainless steel sleeves welded to the pipe end. Numerous changes were implemented in the path that pipes followed to minimise bends and curves, and to facilitate their removal when dismantling the key locomotive sections for workshop purposes.

quoted, it was apparently during design and construction of the Tasmanian pair. This suggests a timing inconsistency as BP’s earlier Fairlie proposals would surely have addressed this critically important feature. However, the key point is that the original design was modified to take account of increases in steam temperature and pressure, and in greater pipe diameters. It remained essentially unchanged in principle over the 50 years that the Beyer-Garratt was built at Gorton Foundry. The mechanically 29

Beyer-Garratt BP had been alive to the implications when building Western Australian Government Railway’s 3’ 6” gauge Class M. With an allup weight of almost 69 tons, this was the first large Garratt and a considerable act of faith by the operator who ordered six examples. BP supplied six blastpipe nozzles of differing dimensions for comparative testing. These were fitted in turn to the same locomotive and worked over the same route with a constant load. The results were reported to BP and the blastpipe yielding the lowest fuel and water consumption was adopted for the class as a whole. Class M worked from 1912 until withdrawal between 1947 and 1951 giving satisfaction on the duties for which it had been built. No doubt other teething problems surfaced with blastpipes or other features on later designs but careful consideration of customers’ views was embedded in all aspects of the story.

The components for the standard expansion joint.

1.3 Blastpipe Despite the greater efficiency of the short, wide-girth boiler that came to typify the Garratt type, early problems were encountered with poor steaming. Because of incompatible track and loading gauges, there was no facility for BP to conduct extended road testing to achieve through the traditional process of trial and error, the optimisation of the relationship between boiler and blastpipe dimensions.

An early debate focussed on whether exhaust steam should be discharged through a single or double blastpipe. With the latter arrangement, steam was discharged from the rear power bogie in the normal fashion while that from the lead unit was emitted through a concentric flanking orifice. Practice would show that the concentric arrangement was expensive to manufacture and to maintain while providing no performance advantage so the single blastpipe became standard.

The concentric double blastpipe layout tried initially but later discarded in favour of a single blastpipe.

The most significant change in design principles was the wholesale fitting of Giesl Ejectors to all but one Garratt class in service with East African Railways in the 1950s. This programme, considered highly successful in improving steaming qualities and reducing consumption rates, was instigated at the operator’s initiative and without Gorton’s participation; further details appear in the East African section of Chapter 12. There were also experimental, short-term, fittings of this equipment on other systems as detailed in the class/ type histories.

Design and manufacture

Nigerian Railways Class 501 – Front power bogie with 4-6-2 wheel arrangement

1.4 Firebox The greater thermal efficiency of the Garratt boiler barrel is reviewed in Chapter 5 ‘Garratt versus the rest’, especially in the context of comparative road tests against other types in South Africa. Regarding the firebox, it had long been recognised that the Belpaire type was more efficient than the round-topped version as the shape maximised water volume at the hottest part of the vessel. Other factors being equal, more energy was thus generated for expenditure of the same amount of fuel and water, and hence reduced running expenses. On the other hand, the more complex shape made manufacture more expensive although the jury remains out regarding maintenance as the Belpaire relies on less variety in boiler stay lengths.

Wartime manufacture continued with pre-war types and orders but production for War Department requirements engendered a broader change in design policy. The first ten WD locomotives were delivered in great haste to an obsolete design as the only available option so these engines retained Belpaire fireboxes from the earlier template. There was time to introduce the superior 2-8-2 power bogie with the second design but the Belpaire firebox had to remain. With the subsequent three WD classes it was possible install more easily fashioned round-topped fireboxes which were welcome as Gorton Foundry was then under intense pressure.. The WD experience presaged the trend towards mass production and away from the bespoke pre-war approach. Among those classes of the Garratt’s Indian Summer (Chapter 12), only the following used Belpaire fireboxes:

Belpaire fireboxes were fitted to all the pre-World War 1 engines as well as all later four-coupled types including the last example, the unusual Leopoldina Railway 2-4-2+2-42. South African Cape Gauge types prior to the enormous 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GL introduced in 1929 all used Belpaire boilers. Great care was devoted to the GL design where the boiler’s maximum diameter (214% that of the rail gauge) precluded the Belpaire’s shoulders. This heralded more use of the round-topped variety, repeated with SAR classes GM, GEA. GMA, GMAM & GO.

Derivatives of the War Department STALIG type as used in Angola, Brazil, Burma, East Africa, Queensland and South Australia Benguela Railway classes 10aIII (timber-burner) & 10aIV (oil-burner) Sierra Leone Government Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4

2. The power bogie 2.1 Frames As Garratts generally followed the pattern of frame development pursued by conventional locomotives, the optional use of plate or bar requires no specific comment here. The only cases where post-construction change in wheel arrangement was necessary concerned the conversion of the three New Zealand Garratts into a class of six threecylinder Pacifics where the original power bogie layout was retained. Also some of the 2-6-2+2-6-2 locomotives of

Among the six-coupled tribe, all designs were Belpaireequipped except South African Railways [2’ 0” Gauge] classes NG/G 12 (1927) and NG/G 16 (1937), Rhodesian Railways’ classes 14, 14A, 15, 15A and the FC Dorada (Colombia) 4-6-2+2-6-4s of 1937. Post-war six-coupled construction was essentially repetition of earlier designs but continued use of the highly successful Rhodesian 4-6-4+46-4 family emphasised the growing presence of the roundtopped type. 31

Beyer-Garratt

Nigerian Railways Class 501 – Rear power bogie with 4-6-2 wheel arrangement

Sierra Leone Government Railway were converted to 2-80+0-8-2s during World War 2. This change was apparently effected with new plate frames and additional driving wheels supplied by Gorton, with the (successful) intent of improving adhesion.

were converted to double-Pacifics (and re-classified R2) after about four years’ service. The main frames were cut ahead of the outer driving axleboxes and a extensions were bolted on to accommodate the original cylinders and valve motion, plus new bogies. Other new equipment included longer connecting and eccentric rods, four-wheel bogie frames, and additional carrying wheels while above the running plate, larger tanks were installed. The main frame extensions took the form of a single casting as shown in the illustration and the modification proved successful as these locomotives continued on their high speed duties until route electrification in 1950.

The other conversion concerned the express passenger Class R1 double-Prairies sold to São Paulo Railway, Brazil in 1927. Rather like South African Railways Class GG of the same wheel arrangement and operational intent, the leading pony truck contributed to a measure of instability. While the South African locomotive remained unmodified and a solitary example, the Brazilian engines

Bar-framed power bogie chassis for the enormous Russian Garratt

Design and manufacture bogie centres; brackets for reverse, spring and brake gear. Manufacture was a specialised task beyond BP’s capabilities so the work was undertaken in the special-purpose plant of General Steel Casting Corporation, Granite City, Illinois using drawings and templates provided by Gorton. Only 42 of the fifty-strong AD60 order were actually completed as the contract suffered serious delays, occasioned in part by BP’s difficulties in finding the requisite US$ currency to settle with the supplier at a time of national economic stringency. The first of South African Class GMA/M appeared more or less concurrently and also fitted with cast steel bed frames. Designed by BP and also manufactured in the USA the first examples were built under licence by Henschel and it was not until 1956 that delivery of this type from Gorton commenced. Cast steel frame extension supplied by BP to enable conversion of São Paulo Railway 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class R1 to 4-6-2+2-6-4 wheel arrangement. The main frames were cut ahead of the outer driving wheel axle boxes and the extension then bolted in place. This modification improved riding qualities and allowed a slight increase in water capacity. It was effected about four years after introduction of these locomotives in 1927; they worked successfully until replaced by electrification in 1950.

When South African Railways resumed acquisition of 4-8-2+2-8-4s in 1952, the new locomotives followed the general format of auxiliary tenders that had been initiated before the war with Class GM to keep weights down. This measure was now even more necessary as inclusion of cast steel frame beds in post-war classes GMA/M and GO had significant effect upon locomotive weight. This structural form was heavier than the fabricated approach but stronger. By comparison, the plate frames of Rhodesian Railways Class 20th suffered cracking. Weight comparisons are shown in the Table to the left, including SAR Class GM as pioneer of this Garratt strain. 2.2 Cylinders and valve gear In the period when the Garratt was becoming established, outside Walschaerts valve gear, longer travel piston valves, and straight-ported cylinders were growing in acceptance. Particular attention was paid to setting valve events in anticipation of locomotive mileages being split more or less equally by work in either direction.

The chassis units were virtually identical which meant that the two motion sets were juxtaposed i.e. when running forward, the die block was in the lower half of the reversing link on the lead power bogie and in the upper half on the trailing power bogie. Some operators (e.g. Rhodesian and Benguela railways) preferred to work exclusively with the This cast steel frame bed for a New South Wales Government Railways chimney end leading which required 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD60 was manufactured in the United States in the midturning at journeys end. This was a minor 1950s. This form was more expensive to produce and heavier than the conventional fabricated frame structure but was trouble-free in service. This issue in Africa where there was plenty of space for provision of easily-built and technology was also applied in contemporary South African Garratts. maintained turning triangles, even at On a larger and more complex scale, the principle of a single minor stations. solid frame structure was adopted in the cast steel bed used in New South Wales Government Railway 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class Where chimney-first working was the norm, it became AD60. The casting included:- cylinders; steam chests; axlebox practice to modify the die blocks so that all were in the guides; bottom pivot centres; draw beam; tank supports; lower half of the reversing links when in forward gear. This 33

Beyer-Garratt

Layout of Walschaerts valve gear on later Garratts to favour forward running.

arrangement yielded more direct drive to the valves and reduced wear on the reversing link trunnions. This was achieved by setting the return crank at 90o behind the main crank on the leading power bogie when moving forward and the return crank at 90o behind the main crank on the trailing power bogie. As apparent from the drawing, the crank layout for the rear unit was transposed rather than reversed as had been the case with earlier Garratts. The 90o setting between main and return cranks was achieved by ensuring that the tail pin of the reversing link was on a line joining the mid-point of the cross head travel to the centre of the driving axle when the main crank is in ‘dead centre’.

A close-up view of the valve arrangement experimentally installed on Rhodesian Railways 13th Class Nos. 170/ 1 whereby Lentz rotary cam poppet valves were actuated by Walschaerts valve motion. By bolting the steam chest to the cylinder block in preference to the conventional method of casting the whole assembly as a single unit, it was possible easily to switch valve types from piston to rotary and vice versa. It transpired that the Lentz valves delivered no significant net benefit so these two engines soon received piston valves and thus conformed with the ten other members of this class

The mounting of all rods and motion externally was a major advantage where workshop facilities were limited, and also with those locomotives whose size made drive components heavy and difficult to handle. The only multi-cylinder design solely reliant on Walschaerts valve gear was the comparatively short-lived 8-cylinder Tasmanian Class M 4-4-2+2-4-4. There were also two types with three-cylinder power bogies, both with outside Walschaerts valve gear and drive to the centre cylinder activated by Gresley conjugated gear. LNER Class U1 2-8-0+0-8-2 No. 2395 formed part of that company’s programme to propagate three-cylinder propulsion but in this case provided no advantage, in fact quite the opposite. The second example was New Zealand Railways 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class G which was unsuccessful for several reasons including difficult access to the centre cylinder. All other BP Garratts relied on two cylinder power bogies.

larger than their inlet companions. Proponents asserted that advantages derived from freer flow through the steam cycle, reduced weight in the complete assembly, less chance of wiredrawing (steam leakage past the valve head), fewer non-productive movements of mechanical parts, wider range of cut-off settings, and reduced exposure to violent temperature change that could induce metal

In the early 1920s, there was a flurry of interest in poppet valves in preference to the traditional piston variety in pursuit of improved efficiency. A drawback with piston valves lay in their undertaking the dual purpose of admitting and exhausting steam into and from the driving cylinders. With steam’s expansive qualities, the same valve thus has to emit a greater volume than was admitted. Poppet valves avoid this problem by using the exhaust ports that are 34

Design and manufacture fatigue. Poppet valves required less of the lubrication that was so important with superheated steam. Less routine maintenance was required but when servicing and adjustment was necessary, this was a more complex process. AE Durrant questioned whether poppet valves were justified with locomotives typically engaged in slow speed slogging and few of the potential benefits listed seem to have applied with BP’s format beyond the larger exhaust ports.

Top. This photograph appeared in the April 1927 edition of The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review and depicts one the six locomotives delivered that year to the Benguela Railway as Class 10A1. It was traditional in being a timber-burner with plate frames and connecting rods that drove the second axle. However, the Walschaerts motion connected with oscillating Lentz poppet valve gear; No 305 was photographed in this condition as late as 1974. These engines hauled 450-ton trains up 1 in 40 gradients with ease. The fourteen members of Class 10aII followed in 1929 differed in having bar frames, drive to the third axle and conventional Walschaerts valve gear – but they were still timber-burners. Above. Rhodesian Railways 13th Class No 171 as built.

Except for Bengal-Nagpur Class N Nos. 823-5 which had conventional Caprotti valve gear, all were built with Lentz poppet valves actuated by Walschaerts valve motion. The valve chests were separate from the cylinders to allow interchangeability between poppet and piston valves although there were no recorded cases of poppet replacing the other type. The fittings to the Rhodesian 13th Class pair and to Bengal-Nagpur Class N Nos 820-5 were experimental and they were later converted to full Walschaerts equipment. This change occurred quite early with the Rhodesian engines but Bengal-Nagpur Nos. 820-5 survived longer in original form (conversion dates unknown). Class NM Nos 826-35 retained Lentz valves throughout their careers although they were outlived by the older Class N.

Below. São Paulo Railway 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class R1 No. 165 was also experimentally fitted with the Walschaerts/ Lentz combination used with Rhodesian Railways 13th Class. For how long this equipment remained is unknown but it may have been removed when all six members of this class Some mystery attaches to the Lentz were converted to 4-6-2 power bogies about four years after introduction. system applied to at least one member

of the Entre Rios Railway 4-4-2+2-44 class. The fitting is described in BP Quarterly Review for October 1927 (page 41) together with a photograph but the standard reference sources are silent on the matter. How many engines were so fitted, their identities, and for how long the equipment remained in place appears to have been unrecorded.

The Leopoldina 2-4-2+2-4-2s were interesting machines for several reasons as discussed in the relevant class history (Chapter 7) but their use of the Walschaerts motion/ Lentz poppet valve combination so comparatively late in the Garratt story was out of step with contemporary practice. This system’s larger exhaust ports were probably the reason i.e. to improve steam flow with locomotives built to work on poor grade fuel. 35

Beyer-Garratt Railway Class GA) adopted the general layout (steeply inclined cylinders and drive to second axle) inherited from the successful 4-8-0 class EB3 (later EAR Class 24). In East Africa the combination of long connecting rods and horizontal cylinders was delayed until arrival of the Class EC3 (EAR Class 57) in 1939, a type that introduced several other fresh features. Exceptions to the general trend were found with the Nigerian six- and eightcoupled classes and with the Bengal Nagpur fleet. This latter operator was an early adopter and evidently saw no reason to change its design policy. The most interesting later divergence was with the 4-6-4+4-6-4s of Rhodesian This is the only photograph (The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review October Railways Classes 15th, 15A and 17th 1927) traced of an Entre Rios Railway (Argentina) 4-4-2+2-4-4 equipped with where drive was to the second axle Lentz rotary cam valve gear. Information on this application is scanty.

The last Garratts to be fitted with Lentz poppet valves were the Leopoldina Railway 2-4-2+2-4-2s.

2.3 Connecting rod It became standard practice for connecting rods to engage with the crank of the third driving axle from the cylinders on both six- and eight-coupled power bogies as this minimised vertical forces at the crosshead. Generally speaking drive to the second coupled axle was more prevalent with older types.

and clearly acceptable in view of their performance. Types where drive was to the second axle are summerised in the table opposite. 2.4

Original reversing gear and the Hadfield Power Reverse Early smaller Garratts were fitted with mechanically linked hand-operated screw reversing gear which was cumbersome to operate but adequate. Larger locomotives

Kenya Uganda Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 classes 13th and EC1 (plus the closely related Emu Bay Railway engines and Tanganyika 36

Design and manufacture meant longer, heavier mechanisms which required power reverse gear, usually a derivation of the Sterling system which was generally favoured in the UK. This comprised a steam cylinder coupled in tandem to an oil-filled cylinder with piston rod stem passing through both and extended at both ends to couple with the reversing rods. The cylinder assembly was usually alongside the boiler, (mostly) on the left-hand running plate, facing forward. The cab control lever connected to a slide valve and to a cataract valve connecting with the ports at either end of the hydraulic cylinder with a cut-off indicator. To adjust forward or back, the driver admitted steam and shut this supply off as soon as he judged the indicator to have reached the desired cutoff. The hydraulic cataract valve closed concurrently. Later, there were changes in the position of the control rod from the cab e.g. to below the running plate. James Hadfield patented a variation to achieve precise setting of the cut-off and to eliminate the tendency for the gear to creep which otherwise could require frequent correction. This change allowed the hydraulic cylinder to be completely filled and to remain free of any air trapped within which previously had been the main cause of creep. The new design pumped oil in from below which eliminated air bubbles. The pump was in the form of a spring-loaded ram submerged in a reservoir with a vertical floating lever that maintained the oil level. In the event of glandular leakage, valves opened automatically to restore the gear to the predetermined position. Precise cut-off selection was achieved by a light handwheel and screw control. The system was introduced with Ceylon Government Railways 2-6-2+26-2 Class C1A in 1945. It proved consistently reliable and became standard with subsequent Garratts.

The order for Bengal-Nagpur Railway 4-8-0+0-8-4 Class N Nos. 832-5 stipulated Caprotti Poppet Valve Gear, as advertised in The Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review. This was the only instance of this equipment on a Gorton-built Garratt; reversion to Walschaerts valve gear was effected in mid-career with A much debated issue concerns the customary these engines.

synchronisation of the power units. The pair might be out-of-step on starting or one (almost invariably that

Beyer-Garratt

Apart from a difference in cylinder dimensions, the power bogies of Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC1 (later EAR Class 50) closely conformed with the chassis of KUR 4-8-0 Class EB3 with drive to the second axle and inclined cylinders. The more modern configuration of horizontal cylinders and drive to the third axle only appeared on KUR with Class 57 (EC3) introduced in 1939.

Ceylon Government Railways took delivery of its first 5’ 6” gauge Garratt, 2-6-2+2-6-2 Classified C1 (works No. 6410) in 1927. It remained a solitary example until 1945 when eight more (works Nos. 7160-7) were supplied, classified C1A. The later engines almost identical, except for being the first to be fitted with Hadfield Power Reverse Gear which was mounted on the left-hand side of the boiler (refer to image on Page 168).

leading) might slip while on the move but they swiftly synchronised of their own accord, there being no mechanical connection beyond the power reverse unit which only sets the position of the die blocks. The MA Crane (Director & Technical Sales Manager) noted: - There has been a lot of inaccurate reporting and comment on this phenomenon. The Hadfield Power Gear on Benguela Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 10C was mounted to the right of the boiler. This locomotive (works No. 7373) was one of 18 delivered in 1951 (running Nos. 331-348). They were modernised versions of prewar Garratts used on this important railway with all the latest design features. Paradoxically they were the last Garratts built specifically to be timber burners using eucalyptus grown by the company.

Design and manufacture the laws of motion the two engine units were like two pendulums exerting a force on a common fulcrum and they would under these laws come into step. I have tried to test this by running with two pendulums on a stick and although not conclusive owing to the rough nature of the experiment, I think it is true. The whole question is rather like “Why is the grass greener?” it is something which happens and must happen. It is a necessary feature for the success of the arrangement. All post-war Garratts were designed with the die block in the direct half of the quadrant on both units when running chimney first so doing the work with the minimum of slip of the die.

First form of pivot

Close observation of Garratts of varying sizes and working in different locations has confirmed this characteristic to be a constant. 2.6 Pivots The flexibility embedded in the concept relied heavily upon the effectiveness of the two pivots that joined the three locomotive sections. In their original form they were similar to the pivot structure used in locomotive bogies. The upper (male) section was a machined, closed-end, cylindrical steel casting attached to the stretcher between the main frames of the boiler unit. This was inserted into a matching (female) receptacle that formed part of a frame stretcher in the power bogie unit. A central pin held the two sections in place in the event of a violent force impacting upon the complete assembly and side bearers not normally in contact with the central cylinder prevented excessive roll. The steel cylinder rested on a phosphor bronze plate secured on the ‘floor’ of the female section and stability was ensured by the downward pressure exerted by the weight of the boiler section. Channels were milled into the bearing surface of the cylinder’s end for the purpose of injecting oil lubrication which proved effective. Wear was inevitable but this merely had the effect of bedding the steel cylinder deeper into the receptacle. The pivot design was refined over the years but the broad principles remained unchanged with the exception of special cases where the pivot was hemispherical in form to accommodate acute changes in track curvature. This need emerged early with the second operational design (the Darjeeling locomotive) which had to cope with 1 in 18 gradients combined with 60-foot radius curves that included 2½ inches super-elevation at the outer rail. The length of tangent between reverse curves was as short of 20 feet of which only six feet might be level. In this case roll (i.e. lateral tilt) was essential but the hemispherical pivot was only ever fitted to the leading unit. Thus the stresses were effectively no more extreme than those exerted by a conventional locomotive whose wheelbase matched that of the power bogies.

Adjustable pivot

They [the power bogies] synchronise to produce maximum drawbar pull as may be required to handle the load. Having no physical connection they will get out of step at various times until some law brings them together (tug-of-war teams come together in rhythm for the maximum pull). They get out of step by slipping which can occur at starting or in running but it never lasts more than a few revolutions. Under all load conditions this is indisputable. The most competent theory (although never published) was given by James Hadfield. He said that under

As weights increased, more sturdy construction techniques were necessary. The stretcher between the boiler main frames including the male section of the pivot became a single steel casting. Peripheral wear was allowed for by 39

Beyer-Garratt The system patented by Hadfield used specially contoured mating faces held permanently in contact by a vertical edge under the action of two long coil springs. The wedge had to be reversible in action thus allowing it to be forced back into position against the spring loading as was necessary in extreme cases of tilting. Design of this system was a complex technical process requiring a degree of trial and error to ensure that the wedge would remain in place under extreme conditions. First applied with Order No. 11136 (Burma Railways Class GE), the inverted pivot structure was maintained but soon reversed with later designs to the original arrangement but now fully enclosed in a sealed oil bath. Further modification involved spring-loaded friction pads to govern vertical travel and thereby prevent excessive roll. As developed by Hadfield, the self-adjusting pivot was applied to all subsequent types and was successful in minimising wear and in needing only modest amounts of maintenance. In fact, it was often unnecessary to dismantle the pivot assembly during major workshop repairs.

Inverted adjustable pivot

shrinking on a renewable steel ring which matched with a ring liner in the lower section. This method was used until about 1928 when greater locomotive size and power accelerated wear at the periphery, inducing undue fore and aft movement in the pivot.

Patent protection which was always a key factor in Garratt development had particular relevance in respect of pivots, especially in refinement of the self-adjusting version. The only competing design initiative specifically focussed on attempted displacement of BP’s dominant role was the Modified Fairlie promoted in 1925-8 by North British Locomotive Co. and Henschel in South Africa These locomotives enjoyed significantly shorter working careers than their Beyer-Garratt counterparts, in major part due to heavy maintenance charges arising from excessive pivot wear.

To reduce this problem, a (patented) means of adjustment was introduced that year and first applied to Order No. 1134 (the New Zealand Railways double-Pacific). The bottom pivot centre had bearing blocks fore and aft inserted/ replaced/ shimmed, the gauge of which was measured by backing the locomotive hard against buffer stops or similar. This rather primitive method was usually effective although dirt in the pivot (which was hard to keep clean anyway) could upset accurate measurement and accessibility limitations complicated the task.

2.7 Wheelbase BP’s promotional material highlighted the wheelbase dimensions of each type in the form of : per power bogie (i.e. from leading carrying axle to trailing driving or carrying axle); rigid per power bogie (the coupled wheelbase); overall (distance between leading axle on front unit and trailing axle on rear unit).

In 1938, another patented system was introduced whereby a captive screw drive from the side of the locomotive worked a horizontal wedge behind a pivot bearing block. This was tightened and then loosened off just sufficient to ensure required rotation of the pivot. Also the entire structure was inverted to eliminate/ reduce retention of dirt and water, a layout first applied with Order No. 1198 (Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC3). These systems had been devised by Samuel Jackson and the second remained the standard fitment until 1948.

Combined with total weight, maximum axle loading, and nominal tractive effort, this information provided prospective customers with a statistical summary that gave an indication of the design’s probable acceptability on their own systems.

The next change came among the suite of design improvements introduced by James Hadfield. His intention was to produce a pivot mechanism that allowed for lateral rolling and longitudinal tilt. The latter (i.e. longitudinal) factor was important to eliminate wear imparted by abrupt gradient changes of the sort common in ‘Garratt country’. Apparently, practice had shown that the pivot had to cope with tilt up to a gradient equivalent of 1 in 35. Rough arithmetic suggests that as two pivots were involved in the process, the degree of maximum gradient change was the equivalent of about 1 in 18. Also, the capacity to selfadjust once the interval of acute longitudinal or lateral stress had passed was important so that correction of any residual misalignment that could also contribute to wear was eliminated.

2.8 Carrying wheels At the time of Herbert Garratt’s patent application he prepared a drawing of a proposed 2-4-0+0-4-2 which was notable as virtually all articulated locomotives types then in service were maximum adhesion. This suggests that he foresaw the value of the guidance imparted by the pony truck for stability and higher running speeds. Following the contractual agreement with Herbert Garratt, the concept’s potential was explored by BP through numerous designs prepared on paper, an exercise that aided the diversity in those engines actually constructed before the Great War. The close relationship with the Great Central 40

Design and manufacture carrying axles and their absence was soon considered an obsolete concept. As discussed in the relevant type commentaries, exclusion was usually caused by outside factors that were inconsistent with BP’s preferences. The first carrying trailer axles used Cartazzi axle boxes. These were located as close as possible to the adjacent coupled axle and had an inclined plane at the top of the box which maintained the requisite centring force. Side play was limited to about one inch which was sufficient for acute track curvature. This was normal practice up until around 1927 but the two axles’ close proximity militated against optimised weight distribution.

One of the power bogies for LNER 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class U1 during locomotive assembly in 1925, showing the lower section of pivot, located equidistantly The Cartazzi arrangement gave way to between the inner driving wheel axles. more effective inboard carrying axles

that used radial two-wheel trucks equipped with sprung side control. This fitting greatly improved riding characteristics as it was superior in withstanding lateral pressures between wheel and rail, in reducing tyre wear, and in permitting more efficient location for bearing a portion of the all-up locomotive weight. This system remained in use for the remainder of Garratt production but was subject to more refinement in bearing design beyond the rigid form originally applied. Absence

Railway’s workshops led to the latter’s participation in early deliberations about use in larger machines. One proposal was an 0-8-0+0-8-0 based on the chassis of JG Robinson’s Class 8A (later LNER Class Q4) This was his first eight-coupled freight type and a quantum leap in locomotive size (hence its ‘Tiny’ nickname). The only difference was a 4” reduction in driving wheel diameter from the GCR standard of 4’ 8”. Other maximum adhesion types were considered as

A complete wheelset East African Railways Class 59 wheel sets.

of inboard carrying wheels was regarded as obsolete and unsuitable from about 1927 but there were exceptions. Two were the pair of Australian industrial 2-6-0+0-6-2s built 1936/ 9 as a loose interpretation of an existing narrow gauge design for Victorian Railways and the ten 2-8-0+08-2s built during the war for service in Burma under crisis circumstances. However, the most significant case was the production batch of thirty 2-6-0+0-6-2s supplied to the LMS in 1930.

reflected in the speculative 0-6-0+0-6-0 illustration that decorated Herbert Garratt’s letterhead when he was based at Levenhulme. BP’s only six-coupled maximum adhesion Garratt, and the smallest built at Gorton, was the pair supplied in 1913 for the Buthidaung-Maungdaw Tramway in Burma (owned by Arakan Flotilla Co Ltd). All BP’s other maximum adhesion Garratt’s were four-coupled. Recognition of the importance of leading carrying axles was significant as it acknowledged the greater speed potential compared with other articulated types. This feature was integral to the Garratt’s versatility and to its safe running at higher speeds. The 1922 road trials in South Africa which are reviewed in Chapter 5 confirmed the importance of inboard

Inboard bogies first appeared in 1936 with the 4-6-4+4-64s supplied to the 3’ 6” gauge Sudan Government Railway; this group of ten was later owned by Rhodesian and then Moçambique railways. Rhodesian Railways followed up with 41

Beyer-Garratt

Close-up of EAR Class 59 trailer truck.

2.9 Axle loading and weight distribution Closely associated with the issue of carrying wheels was weight distribution. The three 2-4-0+0-4-2s of São Paulo Railway Class Q were supplied in 1915 specifically to avoid the cost of bridge strengthening over a comparatively short stretch of almost level route. These unusual engines worked satisfactorily for many years shuttling back and forth with quite heavy loads; they could be likened to a conventional 2-8-2 cut in half. This highlighted a particular Garratt strength in providing a compromise in the generic debate between the mechanical engineer’s desire for larger motive power and the civil engineer’s restrictions on axle loading to preserve physical infrastructure.

slightly enlarged and progressively modernised versions delivered between 1940 and 1952. The 4-8-4 power bogie first appeared with Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC3 (EAR Class 57) in 1939 with more added in 1948 (EAR Class 58). In the closing years of the Garratt epoch, this wheel arrangement was repeated with New South Wales Government Railway’s Class AD60. All those equipped with inboard bogies proved competent designs and the feature proved valuable in both weight distribution and containment of axle loadings. The 4-6-4+4-6-4 wheel arrangement was proposed in 1944 for Argentine Transandine Railway in a design that failed to proceed, possibly due to that operator’s absorption into Ferrocarril Central Northern in 1948. Had demand been sustained into the 1960s, it is possible that all carrying wheels mounted in bogies would have become standard.

Although not pursued for other reasons, there was financial logic for construction of a Fell-system equipped Garratt (proposed in 1926) to cope with the unique difficulties of the 3-mile Rimutaka incline in New Zealand. The antithesis of the Rimutaka situation lay with the Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway whose network served a vast expanse of generally flat lands in the Argentinian 42

Design and manufacture rigging. Throughout these improvements, the system retained the ability to operate the brakes on one power unit in the event of those on the other becoming disabled. With increased locomotive size and the crowded nature of the various control connections, steam and equalisation pipes etc. between the two power units, the single central brake cylinder was replaced by one cylinder on each unit, as had been the case with the first two Garratt designs. Only the rear unit was equipped with a hand brake. Where train braking was by vacuum, it was normal practice for the locomotive brakes to be worked by steam, controlled by a ‘proportional valve’ which ensured that the braking force exerted by the two systems matched. A later variation applied Driving wheels for LNER Class U1 receiving attention in Gorton Foundry in South Africa and Rhodesia saw vacuum during assembly in 1925. brakes on the leading power bogie and steam on the trailing, with the intention of Pampas. Distances were considerable and seasonal freight smoothing out the braking force. The final development was loads could be heavy yet much of the trackwork was poorly individual vacuum brake cylinders on both power bogies. laid and/ or inadequately ballasted. Exceeding 165 tons, the Fuel and water twelve 4-8-2+2-8-4s supplied in 1927 were large locomotives 3. Locomotive length for such conditions but effective in service because of their 3.1 well-planned weight distribution and maximum axle loading A disadvantage lay in overall locomotive length. Citing South African examples, the length over couplers for Class GL was of 12.7 tons. 90’ 8” while that for the GMA/M family was 93’ 10” plus 43’ 11” for the auxiliary tender. (For comparison, North 2.10 Brakes The first Garratts supplied to Western Australian Government Eastern Railway Class 4.6.2 Pacific [LNER Class A2] was by UK Railways had a single vacuum brake cylinder mounted on the standards a long locomotive at 72’ 7” over buffers, engine boiler frame which was connected by rods/ shafts with the plus tender). driving wheels of both power bogies. This layout became the preferred standard for subsequent designs, regardless Promotional material emphasised that boiler girth was of whether the braking system was powered by vacuum, limited only by the loading gauge although this could be a steam or compressed air. Originally the shafts were set slight exaggeration. The available cross-sectional area was in fixed bearings and equalisation was effected by careful governed also by other features that had to fit under or adjustment of the tension to counter the effect of wear. alongside the boiler: Later refinements to the shaft bearings improved fore and Main steam pipes to, and exhaust steam pipes aft equalisation, and the means of adjustment. Additional from, the rear power bogie sophistication followed with additional equalisers in the

Twelve oil-burning 4-8-2+2-8-4s were supplied to the Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway in 1928 to work routes that rarely involved significant gradients but used poorly supported trackwork. Judicious weight distribution resulted in these 166-ton locomotives having a maximum axle loading of 12.7 tons.

Beyer-Garratt -

Brake pipes Water tank equalisation pipe Hand reverse gear to the leading power bogie or power reverse connections to both power bogies Cylinder cock gear to the leading unit Steam heating pipes (when fitted) Electric lighting conduits (when fitted)

3.2 Rotary bunkers Overall length encumbered the LMS Garratts in cramped shed yards, especially during weekend stabling at depots like Saltley. The only means of turning was at triangular junctions but resultant light engine movements were unpopular with traffic management. They therefore worked half their mileage in reverse when flying coal dust made cab conditions uncomfortable. A Spenser-Melksham coal pusher (with sliding canvas cover for the coal space) was tried but found only effective with the bunker partly empty. Also, the motion further compacted the coal which prevented the sloping bunker sides from fulfilling their self-trimming role. Samuel Jackson designed and patented a fully enclosed rotary bunker in the form of a conically shaped barrel with the greater circumference at the cab-end. The upper side of the cone was set horizontally thereby allowing the lower to incline gently down towards the cab floor. The cone rested on rollers at the larger end and it rotated in a bearing bracket mounted on the rear tank. A small reversible steam engine set above the frame towards the larger end powered a worm gear that engaged with an enclosed toothed ring that encircled the cone. Trimming was achieved by rotating the cone which was possible through 360 degrees. Coal was loaded through three hatches in the cone side while the fireman took fuel from the bunker’s end hatch. A retired Garratt driver recounted to the author that on occasions, novice firemen made themselves unpopular through failure to secure properly the loading hatches leading to deposit of the contents on the track during complete rotation.

The conical rotary bunker body used with the LMS Garratts.

The prototype had a 9-ton capacity and having proved effective, thirty examples of the 10-ton standard version were installed. All but two of the class were so equipped and the pusher was scrapped. These were the only BP-built Garratts to carry rotating bunkers but the system was installed by Franco-Belge on its Left. The cradle for the rotary bunker showing the rollers adjacent to the steam-powered worm gear that engaged with the toothed ring. The bearing unit which held the narrow end of the cone is just visible in the background.

Design and manufacture LMS Garratt at Cricklewood depot with hatches open prior to loading.

physical labour. By comparison, the mechanical stoker was a blunt instrument through indiscriminate fuel distribution. However, it was firmly preferred where grate areas exceeded 50 sq ft and cheap labour was unavailable. There was risk that foreign bodies in the coal could jam the mechanism or that friable fuel could be reduced to dust which lowered combustion rates and increased discharge of unburnt material or sparks through the chimney. New Zealand doublePacific Class G led introduction of mechanical stokers on Garratts. Types with mechanical stokers were: (see overleaf)

A few conventional locomotives built by BP had rotating bunkers but the only other application to a Garratt was with the impressive standard gauge Chemins de Fer Paris a la Mediterranee, Algeria No. 231-132.AT.-1 built under licence by Franco-Beige (works No. 2678).

experimental Double Pacific No. 231-132 AT-1 for PML Algeria.

Richard Garrett Engineering Works Ltd [note the ’e’] of Leiston, Suffolk (a wholly-owned subsidiary acquired in 1932) acquired a manufacturing licence from The Standard Stoker Co. of Chicago, USA.

3.3 Mechanical stoker Jackson’s system, which relied on a significant number of moving parts, allowed the fireman to exercise precision in placing fuel around the firebox but failed to eliminate 45

Beyer-Garratt hand-operated screw. Another (Bengal Nagpur Railway Order Nos. 1152-4/ 66/ 7) adopted front end anchorage in the form of pivot pins which allowed the rear end to be elevated about 30o from the horizontal by means of in-built worm-driven hand-powered jacking screws. The third method, used in Rhodesia and East Africa was the installation of bulkhead doors across the recess in the rear tank wall. Early tanks were plain rectangular boxes but by the mid-1920s, form was softened with introduction of rounded corners and upper edges, probably in response to more stylistic designs introduced by German competitors. The Rhodesian 4-6-4+4-6-4 family led introduction of curved streamlined front tank and later matching styling for its rear companion. The purpose seems to have been solely for aesthetic effect i.e. implication of modernity although the descending front profile might have slightly improved forward visibility. Tanks were either rivetted or welded and there seems to have been no firmly established policy regarding preferences. However, welded tanks could suffer badly from cracking through jolting, vibration, A mechanical stoker designed by Standard Stoker Co. surging contents plus acceleration and braking forces. of Chicago, USA installed in a South African Railways Considerable development went into patented flexible Class GMAM. A subsidiary company of BP was a licenced tank fastenings which imparted a shock absorbing manufacturer for this equipment. effect. Most engines were equipped with water fillers on both tanks. On the 6-cylinder New Zealand engines, the 3’ 6” gauge plus inside cylinder and motion combined to restrict the diameter of the water equalisation pipe. Longer pauses East African Railways Class 56 taking water en route through the filler on the leading tank. Based on the wartime STALIG type, ten of these locomotives (works Nos. 7280-9) were built in 1949, intended for the Far East. Only four reached the Orient while six were sold to East African Railways but were distinctive through the solid sheet pilot (cow catcher) favoured by Burma Railways.

Type Operator Class I Rhodesian 20th II NSW Govt AD60 III SAR GMA/M Nos 4051-75 IV SAR GMA/M Nos 4076-140 VI SAR GO SAR Class GEA of 1945 was notable as the last Cape Gauge type to be hand-fired. 3.4 Tanks Garratt boiler tubes were typically shorter than on other types and to facilitate their removal, a U-shaped recess was fitted into the rear wall of the front tank. However, sometimes the need for larger water capacity placed space at a premium so to avoid lifting the tank, Jackson patented other methods of gaining the requisite accessibility. One system (Rio Tinto Railway/ Order No. 1145) allowed the tank to be moved forward on rollers, drawn by a 46

Design and manufacture for tank replenishment en route could offset the advantage of better point-to-point timings. Concurrent with revised tank styling in the 1920s came the more practical improvement of self-trimming bunkers. Fuel capacities seem generally to have been adequate although unusual measures were needed for bulky fuel used by the timber-burners on the Benguela Railway.

One of the four 2-8-2+2-8-2s supplied to the Central Railway of Peru is taking water through the rear tank filler. This standard gauge system was one of the world’s hardest to operate with uncompensated gradients as steep as 1 in 22. ‘Spotting’ a large Garratt accurately next to a water column must have called for considerable skill.

4. James Hadfield: the new order Samuel Jackson had been intimately involved in Garratt development since inception. Strain and overwork in his duties as Works Director and Chief Designer at a time of intense pressure probably contributed to his passing in June 1943. He is reported as having a dictatorial management style and to have had difficulty in delegation.

Above. Tanganyika Railways Class GA No. 301 with forward tilting leading tank raised to improve access to the smokebox for tube removal/ replacement.

Locomotive superintendents of railway companies in office for extended periods tended towards indifference regarding concepts and processes that failed to accord with their pre-determined views. Following a quarter of a century at the heart of the Garratt story, it is possible that Jackson had fallen into this mould. Chapter 9 reviews the debacle of the New Zealand double-Pacifics;

Sliding front tank

Beyer-Garratt designs and devised a programme for performance evaluation of different types in service. Information thus gathered was applied in exploiting design advances. The implication was that Hadfield‘s approach took account of how Garratts performed over time beyond an assumption that Gorton was always right. Numerous aspects of design and manufacture were revised and modernised by him, and this work lay the foundation for the extensive and successful post-war production programme. Hadfield’s open-minded approach ensured that BP harvested innovative ideas from a variety of sources, some of which were ahead of many railway company workshops. Examples of progressive features adopted through these means were: Axle-boxes: roller bearings Crossheads: single-bar 'Alligator' and double-bar 'Laird' Firebox doors: steam-operated Fireboxes: welded steel Grates: rocking & drop (dual powered & hand operated) Hopper ash pan: self-emptying Lubrication: grease for motion pins, connecting & coupling rod bearings Mechanical stokers: advanced designs Nicholson thermic siphons Regulator valves: multiple, integral with superheaters Regulator valves: balanced Rod bearings: floating bronze bushes Smokebox & drafting layouts: improvements based on US practice Smokebox apparatus: self-cleaning, deflector plates & spark arrestors Smokebox ash ejectors: powered by water jet Solid bronze coupled axle-boxes with automatic grease lubrication

Benguela bunker cage

in the formative stages of that project, an Inspector from NZR conducted a thorough inspection of newly-delivered Tasmanian classes L & M. He was impressed with their performance standards, recognised the concept’s potential, but concluded that aspects of the design were out-dated. He recommended that if construction proceeded, some features should be designed by New Zealand Railways. This view conflicted with the perception that UK-based competition motivated BP to keep at the forefront of technological change. NZR mainly purchased UK-built locomotives and the only foreign supplier of significance was Baldwin. At this distance it is hard to judge how valid was this view.

5. Customer relations 5.1 Responsiveness to customer needs Manufacturing efficiency is best tested under crisis conditions. Gorton’s competence was amply demonstrated by its delivery in 1943 of ten War Department 2-8-0+0-82s urgently needed to support the 14th Army’s invasion of Burma. The company was heavily engaged in a multiplicity of projects, and in design work for other manufacturers yet the contract was fulfilled ahead of deadline.

Nevertheless, Jackson’s death was a serious loss but fortunately he was succeeded by his erstwhile Technical Assistant, James Hadfield who was his equal in technical competence. Further, his superior skills in delegation enabled his management of a broader range of issues concurrently. In particular, he conducted a re-appraisal of existing Garratt

This achievement was extraordinary, but perhaps predictable considering BP’s performance with the order for an entirely fresh standard gauge design for Mauritius which was 48

Design and manufacture

Typically railway companies’ works sprawled over many acres (for example Crewe). In contrast, the site of Gorton Foundry was small, cramped, contained by public thoroughfares on three sides and by the Manchester-Doncaster railway line to the north. It is easy to imagine how crowded the facility must have been during World War 2 with a variety of locomotives under construction plus numerous obligations in the manufacture of military hardware. Orders were placed in 1939 for the Leopoldina 2-4-2+2-4-2s illustrated elsewhere in this chapter and these were virtually completed in 1940 but delivery could not be arranged until 1943 due to intense demands on UK merchant shipping. Finding storage space for these locomotives in the interval was a problem and it is easy to see why.

received in December 1927. The first was steamed less than four months later, again within the contracted deadline.

overseas and their lacklustre performance standards offered no basis for demonstration of the Garratt’s full potential. The boiler performance of the LNER Class U1 fell far short of its eight-coupled (and 30 tons lighter) contemporary, South African Class GE as details in the respective class commentaries confirm. Further, the LMS locomotives proved that a Garratt could replace a pair of modestly-sized 0-6-0s but typically low mileages between workshop visits compared unfavourably with standards expected overseas where long journey distances and intermittent service facilities were often the norm.

5.2 Road testing and product demonstration Of the 123 standard gauge engines constructed by BP, 38 were for British operators while the remainder probably exceeded the UK loading gauge. Absence of facilities for pre-delivery road testing added to the need for high quality manufacturing standards and assiduous after-sales liaison. The UK mainline Garratts operated under conditions untypical of the extreme circumstances encountered 49

Beyer-Garratt

Aerial view Gorton Foundry.

5.3 Published data Promotion, marketing and sales policies are reviewed in the next chapter but salient dimensional information appeared in advertisements in the technical media, press releases, leaflets etc. The advertisement appended depicts the 4-8-2+2-8-4 design for the War Department, codenamed ‘STALIG’ [STAndard Light Garratt] that was key in the transition from bespoke manufacture to maximised standardisation. Possible dimensional variations to meet individual operator needs are highlighted together with the traditional promotional information. Cylinder size, boiler pressure and driving wheel diameter sketched in the power potential and the grate dimensions indicated how the requisite energy would be generated. Nominal tractive effort was usually quoted at 75% rather than the 85% reduction factor used elsewhere .

thereby contributing to the reputation for ‘bendability’. This published data provided a succinct summary that implied a powerful machine capable of coping with challenging track conditions. 6. Standardisation Prior to World War 2, the Garratt was largely considered a specialised machine for particular duties. Batch orders numbered in double figures were few which constrained opportunities for scale economies. The numerically largest order was for thirty locomotives placed by the London Midland & Scottish Railway in 1930; some of their key dimensions were standardised but these conformed with the operator’s design practices rather than optimised solutions developed by BP. Whenever possible, standardised dimensions were applied (e.g. carrying wheel and boiler diameters). Another technique was minimal modification of existing types that had been supplied to other operators.

Information to help enlist the civil engineer’s co-operation was provided by all-up weight and axle loadings. In this respect, the wheelbase was important and quotation of the rigid dimension at 8’ 11” as 4’ 5½ shorter than the coupled wheelbase was noteworthy. Achieved by flangeless driving wheels on the axles adjacent to the cylinders and guided by outboard bogies, this arrangement never gave problems 50

Design and manufacture

The benefits of standardisation were evident in this advertisement which lists the operators which had thus far acquired examples of this STALIG-derived design. Further sales would follow based on this type would follow with more to East African Railways plus Queensland and South Australian railways.

The Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review for January 1929 published this alternative interpretation of how a Garratt was assembled.

Design and construction ancestry

Beyer-Garratt Gorton Foundary’s production by wheel arrangement and gauge

LNER U1 nearing completion at Gorton Foundry.

Below. Change in continuity [2]. Twenty-eight years later, Class 14A was the penultimate class acquired by RR. Leading dimensions were virtually unchanged from 13th Class but the modern design incorporated numerous improvements that had been introduced through BP’s continuing policy of development and innovation. However usage had changed in the interval as this class was definitely second string power used for suburban passenger services, branch duties and even shunting.

Above. Change in continuity [1]. Rhodesian Railways was a loyal customer for Garratts from 1925 onward following promotional efforts by Cyril Williams. The first engines were 2-6-2+2-6-2s of 13th Class, acquired principally for main line services over the difficult Beira route. There seems to be no official explanation for the shrouding that enclosed motion and driving wheels. However, dust is a major problem in Africa and the purpose was probably to protect the trailing power bogie. This equipment was apparently removed quite early.

Design and manufacture

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 3 : Selling Garratts

Sluggish, voracious Belfast & County Down Railway 4-6-4T No. 22 (as Ulster Transport Authority No. 222) (works No. 5999) was the result of the Locomotive Superintendent’s interference in the design process which prevented BP from applying best practice. Effective Baltic tanks had been produced as Class S-636 for the New South Wales Government Railway (as pictured in Chapter 1), and also three for the splendidly named His Highness the Nizam’s Guaranteed State Railway Company of Hyderabad, India.

recognised the opportunities. By 1875, a significant number of LNWR-type engines had been manufactured at Crewe for the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway. This led the Locomotive Manufacturers Association to secure a High Court injunction that prevented one railway company from building for another. Stanier 8Fs built at Swindon and elsewhere appeared to breach this injunction during World War II; this was definitely the case with Derby-built 2-6-4Ts supplied to the Ulster Transport Authority in the late 1940s.

here were basic differences between the workshops of the British railway companies and those commercial manufacturers reliant on sales to domestic and overseas operators. Works at Ashford, Crewe, Doncaster etc were solely focussed on the needs of their respective owning companies in what was structurally an inefficient industry. UK railway companies had similar motive power needs and economically there was little logic in creation of essentially the same type of locomotive by different entities. This recurrent ‘re-invention of the wheel’ made design cross-fertilisation rare. For example, adoption of the Ivatt large Atlantic format for Class H1 of the London Brighton & South Coast was an unusual case. Minor dimensional and styling variations camouflaged an unnecessarily complex productive process that duplicated activities. FW Webb, the father of production line technology (years ahead of Henry Ford) and a leading industrialist Dublin & South Eastern Railway 4-4-0 No. 67 running as Great Southern Railways No. 454 (works No. 4645). This locomotive, built “on the cheap” by BP at the request of the financiallychallenged DSER, required a new front tube plate after only four years’ service. This would have been incompatible with the maker’s quality policies.

Selling Garratts Intended to protect the interests of commercial builders, this legal action helped insulate the Chief Mechanical Engineer (plus his preferences and prejudices) from competitive threat. This structure differed from United States practice where Baldwin competed nationwide with American Locomotive Company and others for railroad custom. With UK major railway workshops focussed on meeting internal needs, commercial manufacturers were increasingly marginalised which trend was accentuated with post-Grouping rationalisation. The orders placed by the Big Four with outside contractors in the late 1920s/ early 1930s were at governmental instigation for unemployment relief rather than in response to market forces.

1. Dublin & South Eastern Railway 4-4-0 No. 67 built 1905 (latterly Great Southern Railways No 454). The D&SER was the weakest of the major companies that formed the GSR in the 1924/ 5 Amalgamation with endemic problems that had reduced it to near bankrupt condition. The company complained that No. 67 required a new tube plate after four years’ service. BP responded that (implicitly against its better judgement), the locomotive had been built ‘on the cheap’ at the customer’s request. This could have reflected adversely upon BP’s reputation despite fault lying with the customer. 2. Belfast & County Down Railway 4-6-4Ts Nos 22-25 built 1920. From 1891 until 1945, BP was sole supplier to this company which operated the busy 10-mile Belfast-Bangor commuter route plus sundry rural lines. About 1915, the B&CDR decided that larger engines were needed for Bangor workings and the Locomotive Superintendent insisted on participating in what became a protracted design process. BP recommended 2-6-4Ts but the railway demanded 4-64Ts. The resultant impressive-looking Baltics, too heavy for everywhere except the Bangor line, were sluggish with a voracious appetite for fuel and water. The lamentable performance was attributed to convoluted negotiations that led to their cylinders having negative lead in a classic example of meddling and rejection of the builder’s best accumulated practice.

Commercial Risks Early domestic demand for Beyer Peacock’s products was buoyant but the partnership was active overseas from the start. Export sales grew to provide the core income stream but there were hazards which the railway companies’ workshops never had to confront. The following examples drawn from trading with Irish entities illustrate the point. Between 1857 and 1956, BP handled over 140 orders making it the most prolific supplier to the island of Ireland. The following examples illustrate aspects of commercial risk:

3. Sligo, Leitrim & Northern Counties Railway 0-6-4Ts Lough Melvin and Lough Erne. This company which was perennially in financial difficulties worked a meandering 41-mile route through an underpopulated region. From 1882 until 1951 the only new locomotives supplied were 0-6-4Ts built by BP (ten, identified by name only). The last two were ordered against an anticipated £22,000 loan from the Government of Northern Ireland that did not eventuate so the operator could not pay when completed in 1949. BP saw no value in suing for breach of contract and tried unsuccessfully to sell the pair to the Great Northern Railway (Ireland), South Australian Railways and Victorian Government Railways. Delivery to SLNCR was effected in 1951 when hire purchase terms were finally agreed in what was a case of poor credit risk; in service the locomotives bore plaques advising that they remained the property of BP. (Rather improbably, BP had offered SLNCR a 2-6-2+2-6-2 Garratt in the early 1920s, apparently a 5’ 3” gauge version of South African Railways Class GB). These cases highlighted the importance of the commercial role that was initiated by Richard Peacock. Another issue could be the fickle nature of domestic custom as in the development of an 0-6-0 goods locomotive for the Great Southern & Western Railway. This design’s ancestry lay in similar machines supplied to the Danube & Black Sea Railway in 1860. Around 1866, BP’s engagement in the Irish version presaged Class 101 (known in the UK as Class J15) which eventually comprised over 100 examples. BP supplied only twelve as from 1881, the GS&WR concentrated new construction in its recently up-graded workshops. As noted in Chapter 1, the trend for customers to improve

Credit risk was a constant concern. Delivery of the two 0-6-4Ts built in 1949 for the Sligo Leitrim & Northern Counties Railway (also BP’s last conventional tank engines) was delayed until 1951 when hire purchase facilities were finally arranged. When delivered, these engines carried plaques advising that BP retained legal ownership. The Turfburner.

Beyer-Garratt their in-house manufacturing capacity was particularly relevant in the Garratt’s gestation phase. Further afield, commercial risk was more diverse and less predictable. Language differences, local customs, communication delays, alternative trading practices, legal inconsistencies all contributed to the portfolio. The great ‘catch all’ of political risk could surface in unexpected forms as in the story of the Russian Garratt. Sales evolution Pre-First World War sales promotion focussed on BP’s existing customers. Although sales successes to the subContinent were minor in relation to the size of the railway network, a letter sent in 1909 to the Great Indian Peninsular Railway provides an insight into the tenor of the ‘sales pitch’ at that early stage:‘You will observe that in detail there is no novelty, neither does the engine embrace any experimental and untried components. As a matter of fact, this design of locomotive embraces four leading features, the principles of which are old and can be found in the “Fairlie” engines introduced forty years ago, and other similar types now being presented by Locomotive Builders, but these features, as combined in the Garratt, have resulted in the development of a locomotive of such striking originality and usefulness that it is a marvel to me how Fairlie – and others since who have been engaged in developing the articulated locomotive – could have missed such an obviously simple solution of reconciling a properly designed boiler of large capacity to the limits of the various loading gauges.’

BP was influential in design of Great Southern & Western Railway 0-6-0 Class 101 (J15), relying on experience with similar engines supplied in 1859 to eastern Europe. Twelve of what became Ireland’s most numerous class were built at Gorton including No. 150 (works No. 750), delivered in July 1867 and withdrawn 90 years later. Construction of this class continued at Inchicore until 1903 but the last example built by a commercial manufacturer (BP in this case) was delivered in May 1881. This trend, repeated with other customers, lent urgency to BP’s search for fresh products and markets.

This succinct summary of the advantages cleverly alluded to a well-known but now obsolete concept while acknowledging in the briefest sense recent developments in articulation (i.e. Meyer and Mallet) without actually naming any competing systems. While this particular attempt was unsuccessful, initial sales levels elsewhere were impressive for a novel concept in the spectra of size, gauge, wheel arrangement, and geographic spread. The war interrupted the momentum, especially regarding South Africa for which market construction of prototypes was under consideration. This prospect was revived in 1919 although acceptance of 3’ 6” gauge engines came under challenge. A major operator’s endorsement was important for sales on a broader front and business with other companies had to wait until 1924/ 5. Thereafter growth focussed first on six-coupled Early advertising was concentrated in the UK technical press as with this full page presentation of the first 0-4-0+0-4-0 industrial Garratt of 1924 at work. Although second-hand Garratts in the 1950s and 60s became important industrial engines in southern Africa, BP achieved few sales specifically for industrial work. Nevertheless, this advertisement raised awareness of the type’s operational flexibility.

Selling Garratts

The claim to reduce shunting expenses by 50% required some creativity in cost definition but the generic proposition that a Garratt could replace two conventional locomotives was a recurrent promotional theme. The proposition was proven in haulage capacity in varied environments, before taking to account superior boiler efficiency that helped fuel consumption and excellent riding which reduced elapsed journey times.

Suppliers were happy to be associated through advertising with the product. These illustrations reveal the handsome appearance of LNER Class U1 while the boiler size was eye-catching compared with conventional indigenous motive power.

engines with eight-coupled chassis gradually gaining in importance; four-coupled types were always only a peripheral element, although of rather more importance for manufacturers that built under licence from BP. Validation of the Garratt was contentious and prolonged in South Africa. Recently uncovered material shows that rather than gain near-instantaneous acceptance after trials as some earlier accounts have implied, staunch opposition came from two quarters:- entrenched loyalty towards North British Locomotive Co and resistance to buying further British products in consequence of tribulations suffered during the Boer War of 20 years earlier. Cyril Williams was key in championing Gorton’s cause with ultimate success.

of mass production techniques encouraged greater standardisation, the benefits of which were realised postwar in enhanced efficiencies. The trend towards larger transactions was first manifest in the order placed in 1945 for fifty of 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GEA for South Africa. Although covered by four different order numbers, this was effectively a single integrated package. Further, the ancestry of the war-time STALIG ‘light Garratt’ provided the design base for sales in other markets. Less innovation was evident with six-coupled post-war locomotives which were essentially improvements of earlier types. Sales were intense in the early 1950s through a small group of large orders but despite improved production efficiency, the numbers required exceeded Gorton’s capacity to

Once SAR acquiesced, BP enthusiastically exploited the evidence in other markets. Summaries of successful orders in the inter-war years appear at the start of Chapters 7, 8 & 10. Diversity was sustained in similar fashion to that which had characterised pre-war sales although orders remained predominantly for small batches as the Garratt was still largely considered a specialised machine. Orders in double figures placed by other railways: World War 2 necessitated a major revision in production processes to meet unprecedented demands in design and construction of locomotives plus the obligation to produce military equipment and armaments. Adoption 57

Beyer-Garratt respond promptly. This led to licensing and sub-contract arrangements with certain European manufacturers that proved a successful expedient in a market with declining longer term prospects. Sales in practice The importance of the sales role was highlighted in a cable dated 8 November 1922 from The Company Secretary & Accountant, Gorton to Messrs Chiappini Bros, Cape Town (BP’s South African agents):

20 January: Depart Durban for Bulawayo, Rhodesia and then Elizabethville, Belgian Congo via Johannesburg; return from Congo via Bulawayo to Beira, Moçambique for return visit to Blantyre, Nyasaland over the new Trans-Zambesia Railway (which acquired the first two of three 2-62+2-6-2s in 1924).

15 February (about): Sail from Beira to Dar-esSalaam to visit Tanganyika Railways (buyer of three 4-8-2+2-8-4s but not until 1931), followed by calls on Uganda Railway at Mombasa and Nairobi (purchaser of four 4-8-2+2-8-4s Class EC in 1925).

No date quoted: Sail north from Mombasa for Port Said and Cairo and from there visit Egyptian State, Egyptian Delta, and Sudan Government railways. (Last-named became the first customer for 4-6-4+4-6-4s in 1936).

‘WE ARE VERY SHORT OF WORK. IS IT POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN ORDERS NOW FOR DELIVERY NEXT YEAR. DEFERRED PAYMENTS FOR THE SAME COULD BE ARRANGED’ Gorton copied this message to Williams by letter on 14 November 1922 together with a rather insensitive request that he should obtain from SAR management an indication of the Garratt specifications likely to be confirmed so that the factory could commence work. Williams replied on 11 December that he fully appreciated the gravity of the situation but would remain an SAR employee until the end of that month. He was thus bound to exercise discretion but was doing his best to consolidate interest in the Garratt for the notice of SAR’s General Manager and Chief Mechanical Engineer. Further, he advised his intention to leave for Cape Town on 1 January 1923 (i.e. his first day as a BP employee) to pursue the matter with the agents.

Williams reported that in his call upon the Uganda Railway, he had fully informed his personal friends, CFN Fielding and a Mr Elias (General Manager and Traffic Manager respectively and both newly appointed) about the performances of the early South African engines. He added the following: [1]

Fragile carbon copies of correspondence and sales reports by Williams have survived and this material reflects his resilience and determination. The exact dates of his visit to London in 1922 remain unclear but having secured his future employment with Beyer Peacock, he returned to South Africa aboard the SS Arundel Castle. He later reported to BP that during the voyage he had spoken at length with Colonel Birney, General Manager of the Rhodesian/ Beira/ Mashonaland railways. Birney was interested in the performances recorded in South Africa and advised that he felt the Garratt would be ‘just the engine for the Beira-Umtali section’. (The twelve members of Rhodesian Railways 13th Class were introduced in 1925 mainly for that route).

[2] [3] [4] -

With request that BP’s response be sent c/o National Bank of South Africa, Bulawayo for his collection.

As a senior ex-employee of SAR, the largest railway undertaking on the African continent, his presence carried considerable weight and he obviously hit the ground running on behalf of BP. The lead time between first contact and eventual sale could be considerable as often occurs in promotion of major items or new initiatives. This process, known as ‘laying pipe’, can have a major impact through personal presentation and Williams clearly understood the technique which he would fully exploit over succeeding years.

During the final quarter of 1922, Williams resigned from SAR service, effective from 31 December and reported to BP on 5 December that ‘the General Manager down have taken my resignation in a very nice way’. He also advised of progress with the five Garratts then in service (details are provided in the relevant Class commentaries) and gave details of his planned itinerary to London: -

A request for the name of the railway company in the Belgian Congo to which Société St Leonard of Liege (BP licensee) had supplied a locomotive plus any relevant information about this machine. Indicative price quotations for various Garratt types to help with opening sales negotiations. A request for increased funds for the planned 16,000-mile itinerary (up from £300 to £400!) He estimated he would arrive mid-April 1923 in England.

1 January 1923: Return trip to Cape Town to meet Chiappini Brothers (BP agents), followed by a meeting with management of New Cape Central Railway. (This company acquired two 2-6-2+ 2-6-2s during 1923, later SAR Class GK; it is unclear whether this meeting was to pursue a sales opportunity or for post-contract follow-up)

The Williams papers also include copies of actual sales reports as opposed to planned activities. These relate to his South American visit between June and December 1926, and that to South and Central Africa between 13 April and 26 August 1928. The dates are significant as in 1926, BP was on the cusp of losing the protection of the original patent and part of the mission was to penetrate markets dominated 58

Selling Garratts by north American manufacturers where traditionally the British presence had been minor. The underlying intent was probably consolidation of relationships as a bulwark against fresh competition, once the Garratt market was opened up for competitors.

By the time of the second report, patent protection had expired and to differentiate the product from those of competitors, the type had been restyled as the ‘BeyerGarratt’. The tour started in South Africa where buyer resistance of earlier years had metamorphosed into an ethically doubtful collaboration between the customer and BP’s direct competitors. This probably formed the most determined promotional challenge that he would ever encounter.

It was originally planned to visit Brazil, Argentina and Chile but while in the last-named country, BP asked him to add Peru and Colombia. On his own initiative he included Bolivia and Ecuador, and during the return journey stopped off at Jamaica. He travelled an estimated 30,000 miles during this programme.

South America (June to December 1926) Williams defined his objectives in the following terms to: -

offered greater profit potential. Analyse the nature of individual railways’ operational problems in order to identify how and where the Garratt type could be deployed to greatest economic advantage while acknowledging embedded conservatism by many managers towards innovative solutions. Maintain dialogue with prospective customers in cases where sales negotiations become protracted. Visit appointed and prospective agents to provide salient details that might help encourage sales.

Brazil: British-owned railways accounted for 4,000 route miles with the remainder under Brazilian control. Sales of British equipment were negligible as two major American manufacturers maintained their own facilities and personnel in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo. German and Belgian manufacturers had also made considerable progress and Williams concluded that BP’s presence was inadequate by comparison. He felt that the market‘s geographic size and demand potential justified a permanent local BP establishment. A further issue was the local custom of purchase on extended credit which added an unwelcome feature to viable trading prospects. He established contact with the following railways:

Introduce to railway personnel ‘our special status… as first-class manufacturers and designers of every kind of locomotive…’ Maximise awareness of the capacity to effect prompt delivery at attractive prices following opening of the company’s new boiler shop and completion of works modernisation. Establish personal contact with all senior railway officials as a basis for maintenance of appreciation of customer demands. Advance especially the claims of the Garratt type while reminding that BP also built conventional locomotives. It was noted that while the latter were invariably purchased through process of open tender, the exclusivity of the Garratt type

South America was a target market but for several reasons, the Garratt never achieved the prominence it enjoyed in Africa. Commercial relationships with British-owned companies were a priority as in the case of the international Transandine Railway in Argentina and Chile, but other suppliers were already well-entrenched. This railway was hard to work with gradients as steep as 1 in 12 to 14 over extended distances on both sides of the Andes which necessitated rack-and-pinion drive. For these sections, Kitson & Co of Leeds supplied 0-8+6-0T rack and adhesion Kitson-Meyers, the first in 1907. This was an effective solution to a specialised problem which required design complexity of a scale never adopted in a Garratt. The locomotive depicted was employed on the Chilean section of the Transandine. As described in Chapter 8, four Garratts closely based on South African Railways Class GK were supplied in 1929 for use on the easier sections. When part of the railway was out of commission through a natural disaster, two Garratts temporarily worked as bankers on trains hauled by these Kitson-Meyers. D Binns Collection

Beyer-Garratt

The Antofagasta (Chili) & Bolivia Railway was a pre-World War 1 sales target but the operator chose to rely on proven principles rather than risk the novel Garratt concept. The Meyer and Kitson-Meyer types were well established in South America and the operator decided to place an order for six of the former with Gorton Foundry (works Nos. 5617-22) in 1913. Excluding the back-to-back 2-6-0Ts supplied to Ferro Carril Interoceanico, Mexico in 1889, these were the only non-Garratt articulated locomotives built by BP and they remained at work at least until the mid-1950s. Nevertheless, this railway eventually saw the light and later purchased nine 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts. D Ibbotson

Leopoldina: BP had supplied ten 4-6-2s in 1924 and this railway was delighted with their quality and performance; shortly before the report was completed, an order was received for ten more. (The first two of what ultimately became a fleet of 20 Garratts were sold to this company in 1930) Estrado de Ferro Central do Brazil: Williams considered it impossible to make progress with the country’s largest railway in the time available but hoped that ‘seeds were sewn… which one day may bear fruit’. Sorocabana: A smaller company where the prospects were similar to those with the Central of Brazil. Mogyana: The Garratts had been satisfactorily in service ‘for some 12 [sic] years’ but the company had since reverted to further Mallets, attributed to the hiatus of the war and the effectiveness of local American manufacturer representation.

This advertisement appeared in the July 1927 issue of The Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review. The company was ever keen to demonstrate the scale and diversity of its products. The Arakan Flotilla 0-6-0+0-6-0 in the lower foreground was the smallest Garratt produced at Gorton while the Chilean Nitrate Railway 2-8-2+2-8-2 behind was the largest at that date.

Selling Garratts -

Buenos Aires & Pacific [three 4-8-2+2-8-4s built in 1928 plus one in 1930] Cordoba Central [ten 4-8-2+2-8-4s built in 1928] Transandine [four 2-62+2-6-2s in 1930]

He also visited the following:Central Argentine, Argentine State, Meridiano Quinte, Buenos Aires Provincial plus existing Garratt customers: Entre Rios/ Argentine North Eastern railways. Five different Garratt designs were submitted to the Director General of Argentine State Railways and he also met the Minister of Public The Chilean Nitrate Railway engines were remarkable machines for several reasons - Works in this regard. He size, modern design features, the first oil-fired Garratts, and the extraordinary conditions had reservations about under which the railway operated. These factors combined to make them an excellent satisfactory payment terms ‘sales story’ from which BP strove to extract full benefit. with the state railway but no business resulted. Williams São Paulo: Several footplate journeys were made on travelled about 9,000 miles in this country and met over expresses to study operating conditions in anticipation of sixty railway company senior officials during his eight week the six high speed Garratts then under construction by BP tour. (delivered in 1927). This experience was valuable in fully understanding the customer’s needs, especially as these Chile: locomotives were one of BP’s few passenger Garratt designs. He visited the Chilean State Railways at Valparaiso, Williams also met a Col. McDonald who was surveying an apparently to establish first contact as BP was previously alternative 45-kilometre route for this railway to eliminate unknown to this organisation. Williams reported that the Sierra Incline. Thirty-seven kilometres would be at 1 business might be done on the basis of attractive pricing and in 40 and Williams strongly promoted the Garratt with provision of 3 to 5 years credit on sales, adding the hopeful McDonald and the consulting engineers, evidently without remark ‘The Chilean Government have seldom, I am given to understand, been known ever to default’. Special attention success. was paid to the CSR’s needs and designs were submitted but no orders followed. He then visited the headquarters of the Argentina: The railway network totalled 24,000 route miles of which Antofagasta (Chili) & Bolivia Railway, and later met the same 16,000 were British-owned so understandably BP was well organisation at the Bolivian end of the system. known. Williams estimated that he needed four months adequately to cover the country as opposed to his allotted He then went to Iquique and spent five days with the eight weeks. He regretted the failure to promote the Garratt Nitrate Railway’s Garratts, then the world’s largest. earlier as sales opportunities were substantial. The terrain Apparently another 13 days were expended in discussions was largely flat with gradients rarely steeper than 1 in 200 with senior staff in the CME’s office. These negotiations so railway officials generally considered articulated power were with three Chileans and a gentleman named Cornish to be unnecessary. However, much trackwork was poorly who was experienced in US practice. Cornish criticised the supported making its maintenance costly. Williams actively Garratt from the traditional American standpoint and it pressed the argument that a large Garratt with low axle took three weeks for Williams to persuade him to a more loading would be ideal. He was confident that based on this amenable view. After the visit, ‘these gentlemen submitted a unanimous report in favour of the Garratt locomotive and argument, orders would follow from the following railways: its adoption in general service’. Williams added that he had ridden on a 400-ton train and that the Garratt’s performance Buenos Aires Western [no business eventuated] up a 1 in 21 gradient was ‘really extraordinary’. Proposals to Buenos Aires Great Southern [twelve 4-8-2+2-8-4s built in 1927] 61

Beyer-Garratt Chilean operators included a metre gauge Garratt capable of tackling 1 in 16.6 gradients and a 5’ 6” gauge high-powered double-Pacific passenger locomotive, but no sales were achieved.

banks had closed and the state of Ecuador had defaulted on its financial obligations. Matters later improved as three Garratts were sold to the G&QR in 1929. Colombia: The total rail network was about 1100 miles (less than that of the Cordoba Central Railway in Argentina) and made up of 25 different railway companies, often isolated from each other by hundred of miles of inhospitable terrain. Williams rated this as one of the most inaccessible countries in the world. Travel times were lengthy by mule and river boat to reach various railways with risks ‘brought about by the almost uncivilised people and the primitive conditions under which major portions of the country exist’.

He also diverted to the headquarters of the Transandine Railway where he strongly recommended that three Garratts would improve services and reduce operating costs between Mendoza and Zanjon Amarillo. He was confident that an order would follow and in 1929, BP supplied four Garratts closely based on New Cape Central Class G (SAR Class GK). Williams found that Chileans disliked American business methods and were more willing to do business with the British than was the case in Argentina. Bolivia: Williams returned to Buenos Aires from Chile and then travelled north by the Central Argentine Railway, crossed the border and then travelled from Villazen to Atocha over a route operated by the Bolivian Government, and then by the eastern section of the Antofagasta system to La Paz. He spent time with railway officials hoping to re-ignite interest in the Garratt which BP had unsuccessfully promoted to this company before World War 1. The Antofagasta had demurred but compromised by purchasing six Kitson-Meyer type 0-6-6-2s in 1915, the only non-Garratt articulated locomotives built by BP in the 20th Century. Williams’s persistence with the Antofagasta in both Chile and Bolivia led to the sale of three 4-8-2+2-8-4s in 1929 (and six more in 1950).

Nominally ideal ‘Garratt country’, the main purchase criterion was price rather than quality and while in Bogota, a contract for a conventional locomotive was awarded to a Belgian manufacturer at £4,300 per unit compared with BP’s quote of £8,030. Further, where articulated power was needed, Mallets and Kitson-Meyers were already well established. Of particular interest was a visit to Ferrocarril del Pacifico to whom Armstrong Whitworth had supplied a pair of 4-6-0+06-4 Garratts in 1924 (in breach of patent). Williams reported ‘…it was a great pity that Armstrongs built them. They are badly designed and have a wheel arrangement unsuited to the road on which they have to run; they also embody many faults we had in earlier Garratts. They are hauling 100 tons less than the load for which they were designed.’ This was a significant forerunner to the situation that Williams would face once BP’s original patent expired.

Peru: Re-ignition of interest was high on the agenda as BP had almost succeeded in discussions with the Peruvian Corporation in 1923. The transaction had been vetoed at the last moment over price plus fears about locomotive weight. Williams travelled over the system which reached an altitude of 15,628 feet and in a distance of 108 miles had several reversing stations (which required zig zag train reversal), 66 tunnels, 61 bridges and 75 miles of continuous 1 in 25 gradients. Extensive meetings were held and while Williams retained reservations about the financial condition of the Central of Peru Railway, he was confident that weight concerns could be satisfactorily alleviated. Sales of 2-82+2-8-2s that were broadly similar to the Chilean Nitrate locomotives followed in 1930.

Williams rated sales opportunities as poor for several reasons although he hoped that 3’ 0” gauge Ferrocarril del Dorada might order three locomotives (a pair was eventually sold to this company in 1938). He felt that it would 5 to 10 years before government plans to expand and improve the railway system would offer substantial potential. There were also practical difficulties in finding a competent local agent prepared to work in a market with so little to offer. Beyond the Dorada transaction, no other Garratt sales were secured in Colombia. Jamaica: Despite apparent intentions, there is no record of Williams’s visit to this colony, home to the second oldest railway in the British Empire. The standard gauge Jamaican Railway Corporation had been started in 1845 and the mainline connecting Kingston with Montego Bay through the spectacular Cockpit Country would have been ideal for Garratts.

Time was also spent with the Southern Railway of Peru about which Williams was disparaging. The company’s poor financial condition was in part due to use of poorly-built, ageing American locomotives which incurred heavy repair expenses. He concluded that a pair of modern Garratts could replace at least four of these veterans with significant net reduction in working expenses, but no sales eventuated.

Summary: Williams concluded with several remarks including his belief that Garratt promotion should continue as an independent effort, discrete from that for conventional locomotives. He also debated the need for selectivity in identifying countries where permanent agency representation was warranted e.g. the vast existing Brazilian market, and Colombia where he felt there would be eventual promise. Interestingly he

Ecuador: This country in Williams’s view had only one railway (the Guayaquil & Quito) worth considering but this was in a forlorn state and had recently come under American management. All but one of the country’s commercial 62

Selling Garratts queried the wisdom of English-language advertisements in, for example, the Brazilian technical media.

quality of materials etc, any front-end cost advantage could dissipate in the short/ medium term. Thus false economies would ultimately incur far greater expense in rectification of unsatisfactory machines. Williams also voiced BP’s displeasure with SAR’s trading practices, summed up in the following passages in his report:

Those experienced in business development for sale of goods and services in ‘virgin territory’ will readily recognise the variety of obstacles that can be encountered although hopefully less extreme than those that Williams had to tackle. Frustration and disappointment are common in this work but the foregoing indicates that his ‘strike rate’ (i.e. the percentage of contacts that ultimately led to sales) was satisfactory.

‘…that they apparently without the slightest compunction extracted from manufacturers their total experience in a particular line, handing it over to their worst competitors by virtue of lower wages.’ AND ‘…to bring to the attention of the Administration and Railway Board that the design of the large Garratt under consideration had been submitted by BP, and that they had no right to photograph our drawing and send it round the world calling for tenders; that the order was legitimately ours’.

South and Central Africa (13 April to 26 August 1928) South African Railways: On arrival in Cape Town on 30 April, Williams first met an old friend, JR More, who fortuitously had recently been appointed General Manager. He briefed Williams on current problems stemming from ill-disciplined purchasing programmes and acquisition of sub-standard equipment from continental European manufacturers, chosen for price rather than quality. One example quoted was Belgianmade rails bought at £2 per ton cheaper than the British equivalent; 23% of these items were discarded having been found faulty. Quality problems had also been encountered with locomotives purchased from the USA.

The selection process depended heavily upon the views of the CME (Colonel FR Collins) and Williams cryptically commented ‘…it was first necessary to get this gentleman to favour our proposition, and many hours were spent in accomplishing this.’ Collins is now considered to have acted incompetently regarding articulated locomotive acquisitions following expiry of BP’s patent which was probably a factor in his employment termination in 1929. Promotion of BP’s proposal must have been fraught in face of public disquiet over large locomotive safety, Afrikaans-based opposition to buying British, the need to reverse Collins’s prejudices, and the question of price. Having secured the CME’s support, Williams then conducted lengthy one-on-one interviews with the six other members of the Tender Board. On the basis of a contract for ten large Garratts, the quoted unit prices in pounds Sterling were:

Standardisation had suffered through the Chief Mechanical Engineer’s policies (discussed in Chapter 5), resulting in 169 different locomotive classes in service. Williams reported that this made ‘every 15th locomotive a different type and also that every 129th wagon was of different design’. Also there had been several recent accidents which had brought uninformed press attention focussed on alleged excessive locomotive size in relation to the Cape Gauge. Williams was given carte blanche to inspect locomotives, workshops and running sheds during a three-week window before tenders had to be submitted for supply of the largest Garratts yet. BP had already provided preliminary drawings for its proposed design which had then been copied and unethically distributed, apparently by the CME, to BP’s competitors. Prior to the deadline, Williams visited Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg to monitor the condition and performance of the 50 German-built articulated locomotives then in service. As an experienced and popular ex-senior SAR employee, Williams made good use of his time in meeting personnel at all levels, riding the German locomotives, and assessing related operating and repair expenses. These exchanges highlighted the degree of problems and dissatisfaction presented by this fleet (see Chapters 5 & 6). Armed with information thus gathered and supported by JR More, he entered extended, demanding debate with the SAR Tender Board. His investigations had made him better informed than any Board member about daily operational problems.

Collins hedged his bets by supporting the purchase of two locomotives, which must have reduced BP’s chances of maximising scale economies on the project. Williams’s approach succeeded as the CME’s decision was confirmed against the solitary opposition of TH Watermeyer, Assistant General Manager. The next hurdles were to gain the approval of the main board of SAR, plus the sanction of the Auditor General and the Minister of Railways. By now JR More

He argued that suitability rested on more complex factors than merely price and that by failing to take account of the manufacturer’s accumulated experience, design efficacy, 63

Beyer-Garratt

This map of the Benguela Railway shows part of the route completed with the eastern section through to the Belgian Congo still under construction. By the time of Cyril Williams’s trek this section was operating although the final eastern leg, for which the additional Garratts would be required had yet to be finished.

Selling Garratts was firmly in the BP camp, and Williams had sent briefing memoranda to main board members and the Minister in advance of the main board’s decision. At least one week was devoted to these deliberations. These tactics worked as there were no further objections from those quarters but the Auditor General remained intransigent. By now, JR More felt empowered to press the case firmly, adopting the attitude to quote his own words ‘that the Auditor General was not running the railway’. JR More had wanted the new engines to have copper fireboxes and Nicholson’s Thermic Syphons but these requests were declined on grounds that they would have pushed the unit price to £15,000.

he feared that with experience, they would produce engines that technically matched BP’s standards. These tortuous negotiations resulted in the magnificent SAR Class GL and six more were soon ordered. In the longer term, Williams was correct in hoping for BP’s reputational enhancement as these locomotives proved to be a pivotal design. The nine year interval before more Cape Gauge Garratts (Class GM) were supplied was due to other factors but his hopes were fulfilled. BP’s position as the preeminent supplier of Garratts was secured in the eyes of SAR, and more importantly the market generally. Large Garratts would be built later by other manufacturers but only under the aegis of BP

Williams noted that no profit was expected on the transaction but that if successful, BP would receive orders for more of the type and added ‘…being over 200 tons in weight and the highest powered engine ever constructed in this country or running in the world outside the United States, such an order is bound to considerably enhance our reputation as designers of large engines… the order with us at over £3,000 per locomotive above the lowest German price will be a very useful argument…’. JR More quite reasonably sought assurance that Williams would closely monitor construction and liaise over any corrective action that might be necessary as he remained sensitive about how adversely a BP ‘failure’ would be received by the public, government and SAR hierarchy.

The rest of the African tour was less politically sensitive. Relevant sales details appear in the company/ class commentaries but Williams’s continuing odyssey is summarised: Rhodesia Railways: A week was spent in Bulawayo talking with RR officials, mainly to promote sale of eight-coupled Garratts. Twelve six-coupled engines had been in service for 3½ years and six more were in course of delivery. For 18 months, Williams had been actively promoting eight-coupled power as being ideally suited to RR’s needs. His presence was much appreciated by the CME and his team, and Williams left with the promise that providing the price differential was not too great, an order would follow. The first of 2-8-2+2-8-2 16th Class entered service later that year.

In conclusion, Williams noted that with the German Garratts, the workmanship was excellent and sometimes better than BP’s. Deficiencies lay in faulty design factors and

This photograph, which appeared in the April 1929 issue of The Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review, was taken during Cyril Williams’s 800-mile plus journey over the Benguela Railway westward from the Belgian Congo border to Lobito on the Atlantic coast. Williams is believed to be the gentleman in the pith helmet standing to the left in front of the permanent way trolley used for the journey, apparently during a (petrol) refuelling stop. The timber stacked in the background is evidently cut eucalyptus awaiting loading into steam locomotives; the company’s commercial services then relied solely for fuel on the produce of its own plantations.

Beyer-Garratt

The type is synonymous with the successful handling of heavy loads over steeply graded, sharply curved routes which was far removed from pedalling along at 15-20 mph with loose-fitted freight trains over the ex-Midland Railway mainline. The LMS 2-6-0+0-6-2s did indeed eliminate double-headed 0-6-0 tender locomotives but failed to deliver any other notable advantages. Had they done so, BP would surely have mentioned such factors. The advertisement was probably aimed solely at the Big Four although the chances of it having much effect must have been slim.

Chemin de Fer du Katanga [CFK] (Belgian Congo): Williams’s final scheduled call was on the Benguela Railway at Lobito Bay, Angola. The conventional route would have been return by rail to the Cape and wait for a west-bound steamer but he elected to travel overland to the Belgian Congo. There he met the General Manager of the CFK at Elizabethville to advance the cause and was encouraged that consideration would be given to acquisition of a Garratt soon. Williams advised that any order should be placed with either Anglo-French-Belge or Société de St. Leonard as these companies then held the rights for supply to the colony.

a permanent way vehicle. He noted that the British-owned Benguela Railway was well-constructed with 60 lb rail which on completion of the Katanga Railway in the Congo would prove an important route. Williams reported that the six timber-burning Garratts already in service were performing well but hampered by poor repair facilities. Fourteen more would soon be needed, four of the same design and the remainder with smaller driving wheels. He believed that his presence would help confirmation of this business when tenders were invited. He was well looked-after by the railway, and was granted a free pass. He returned home with a complete list of the alterations required for the next Garratts and an assurance that future engines would be bought from BP, confirmed by separate letter to London. Williams noted that his first-hand experience placed him in a strong position to negotiate with the Benguela’s UK consulting engineers. The feeling that this order was ‘in the bag’ must have been satisfying at the end of this arduous tour. In 1929, BP supplied fourteen examples of 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 10aII (all with the same driving wheel diameter as the first six).

Caminio de Ferro de Benguela (Angola): Apparently, it was possible to travel by train to N’tenke in the Belgian Congo but from there he used a recently inaugurated ‘road’ motor service to the railhead of the Benguela Railway which had reached the Angola border on the Loao River. The distance overland as the crow flew was about 340 miles but with the scarcity of safe river crossings and the nature of bush tracks, the distance driven was closer to 600 miles and took a week. He then traversed most of the 840-mile route to Lobito Bay by ‘motor trolley’, presumably 66

Selling Garratts Sales progress in the 1920s Burgeoning sales were reflected in the extensive modernisation of facilities at Gorton Foundry between 1923 and 1926. Despite the large number of Garratts and conventional locomotives built in 1925, Chairman Fay publicly expressed dissatisfaction with the year’s financial results noting that the latter were being built at greater cost than those of direct competitors. He repeated these concerns in 1928 although by then the composition of successful sales had altered. In the years 1927/ 29/ 30, delivery to customers of Garratts exceeded that of ordinary locomotives. This profound change in the character of BP’s trading validated decisions taken 20 years earlier to embark on the Garratt enterprise through exploitation of Herbert’s original idea.

that the Garratt was a product that flourished principally within the ambit of the British colonial system. The 1930s The pace of sales, so promising in the later 1920s, fell away abruptly after 1930. Ninety-two new Garratts were delivered that year, five in 1931, six in 1932, none in 1933, and one in 1935 (an industrial 0-4-0+0-4-0 “Vivian” for Guest Keen Baldwin). This experience was typical for UK heavy industry during the 1930s. Sales 1931-9 are summerised below: Note spelling and punctuation. In the period 1937-9, 46 six-coupled locomotives and 39 eight-coupled locomotives were supplied which shows how poor trading had been in the years 1931-6. During that desperate time, Fay’s earlier concerns about sales and pricing performance plus trading margins at individual unit level became peripheral to the over-riding objective of corporate survival.

Nevertheless, progress in the 1920s averted attention from some weaknesses in the geographic spread of sales. The subContinent was an obvious market for British-manufactured products and it is hard to explain why BP made so little progress there. The probably unfair assessment of the Darjeeling locomotive and the unbalanced nature of the North Western Railway trials might have discouraged early interest but against possible resultant reputational damage, the formidable Bengal-Nagpur fleet should have firmly refuted any doubts among possible customers.

World War 2 Construction from 1940 onwards assumed a different pattern. Some locomotives were supplied to meet orders lodged pre-war or to expand classes of which more examples were required. Locomotives in these categories were despatched to East Africa, Nigeria, Sierra Leone (all existing designs) plus a fresh type in the form of 2-4-2+2-42s for Brazil.

South America was a vast market where operational difficulties provided an ideal environment for the Gorton product. Williams’s sales efforts as detailed above did achieve results but in reality, with a few exceptions, single orders for small numbers of locomotives was hardly success on a sustainable scale. Perhaps the situation is best summed up with the Mogyana case where pre-World War 1, Garratts were enthusiastically acquired in preference to Mallets but lack of customer follow-up saw American products later restored as the prime motive power source. Williams was probably right that a permanent BP presence locally was needed but whether the funds and organisational resources would have been justified remains questionable. For all the diversity achieved in the decade, the core reality remained

Of particular significance were the five types totalling 69 locomotives built for the War Department. They marked a distinct change from the practice of one-off engines or small batches constructed for specialised needs. The new breed heralded the concept of Garratts primarily designed for heavy freight duties but capable of general or mixed-traffic service. War-time construction improved the ability to build in significant numbers and thus generate scale economies to greater degree than previously possible. Post-war Six-coupled construction was essentially a continuation

Beyer-Garratt

Selling Garratts Left opposite. Customer endorsement is a powerful aid to sales promotion and this advertisement in the October 1928 issue of The Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review fulsomely summarises many of the advantages that underwrote the type’s success. The curiosity is that, for all the declared enthusiasm of Ceylon Government Railways, the locomotive depicted remained a singleton from 1927 until eight modernised examples were added in 1945. The interval was partly due to the war but also illustrates the fickle pattern of some sales in the 1920s and 30s.

of pre-war types with certain modified features that had resulted from later experience and development. The closest to fresh initiatives were found in the Rhodesian Railways fleet. Class 14A 2-6-2+2-6-2 was a continuum of RR’s 14th Class of 1928 which included several modern features in what was a successful general utility type. The other important design with pre-war (and unusual) ancestry was RR Class 15th/ 15A 4-6-4+4-6-4 of which 70 were produced, forming one of the most celebrated of all Garratt types. There is evidence that more of this wheel arrangement might have been seen with other post-war

This advertisement issued about 1939 displayed South African Railways Class GM and conveyed an important message. It showed that the company had worked out a means of circumventing the weight issues that had limited the availability of Class GL while still delivering a very large Garratt. The concept would be exploited extensively in South Africa after the war. Simon Colbeck Collection

Beyer-Garratt

Another example of the ‘little and large’ theme was in Gorton yard by the works photographer to demonstrate the full spectrum of production. This image dated 1947 shows Nepal Government Railways 2-6-2+2-6-2 No. 6 (order No. 11138, works No. 7243) with a South African Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GEA behind. The NGR locomotive was the second (with detail improvements) of a type first supplied in 1932 and makes an interesting comparison with the GEA’s modernity.

operators had circumstances been different. Eight-coupled types followed trends that in the main derived from the War Department-sponsored STALIG and SHEG projects. Both ‘light’ and ‘heavy’ types found employment with several operators including after an interval of over 40

years, a return to the country where the story had started – Australia. Finally, BP demonstrated that it retained its creative flexibility in the last fresh design of all, the Sierra Leone 4-8-2+2-8-4s which have been described as a lot of engine for so narrow a gauge.

Two of the standard gauge Central Railway of Peru’s 2-8-2+2-8-2s on shed. They were conceptually similar to the Chilean Nitrate Railway locomotives although different in several dimensions. Three were purchased in 1930 and another in 1932, but they were unpopular as being too large and powerful for the conditions under which this railway operated. Thus they consumed a lot of servicing resources in the maintenance of a type whose potential could not be fully exploited. Despite the drawbacks, BP’s good relationship with the operator was sustained as there were subsequent sales of successful 2-8-0s.

Selling Garratts Contract specifications A major hurdle before the age of instantaneous electronic communication was establishment of understanding and agreement of the product’s technical specification prior to signature of contract. Generally speaking, operators were satisfied that they received the locomotives that they had expected but there were instances where the product did not fit the need. One case concerned the two 4-8-2+2-8The Central Railway of Peru desisted from further Garratt purchases after 4s supplied to 3’ 6” gauge Nigerian the transactions of 1930/2. Nonetheless, the operator recognised the type’s Government Railways in 1930 with inhererent advantages and BP’s engineering standards. Later ideas for smaller the intention that they should Garratts were dropped in favour of ‘Andes’ Class 2-8-0s of which 49 were work from Lagos through to the purchased between 1936 and 1953. BP built more (five in 1953 and three in 1957) for Cerro de Pasco Copper Corporation, Peru, an industrial system. This is CPCC northern reaches of the system, and No. 72 (works No. 7623 of 1953); the third of the second batch (works No. 7779) to eliminate the hitherto common practice of double-heading. The was the last conventional engine built at Gorton Foundary. northern section was laid with 45 lb/ yd rail and these locomotives with a maximum axle loading of 9.5 tons were the largest ever to run on such fragile track. However, they proved too powerful for the traffic levels obtaining and perhaps inadequate due diligence had been exercised in drawing up a design that came so close to the limits imposed by the infrastructure. Whether the fault lay with operator or manufacturer, or in poor communications, cannot be determined at this date. The pair worked until the end of steam in Nigeria but the 22 Garratts that followed were smaller, double-Pacifics of greater practical use. Another example related to the three 2-8-2+2-8-2s sold to the Central Railway of Peru (FCC) in 1929. Although dimensionally different in several respects, these engines resembled those of the same wheel arrangement that worked with success on the Nitrate Railways of Chile from 1926. Operationally, the FCC was arguably the world’s toughest railway to operate. The maximum loads that the Garratts could handle resulted in trains that were too long for the reversing facilities, most of which could not be viably extended because of their precipitous mountain-side locations. A fourth Garratt was delivered in 1930 but these engines were reportedly unpopular for their size and their servicing demands. Because of the Publication of validated performances was another form of customer endorsement. Readers of The Locomotive Railway Carriage and Wagon Review can hardly have failed to note the statistics on the front cover of the issue for 15 November 1946. The message was topical as Kenya Uganda Railway 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class EC3 had performed spectacularly during the years quoted and the extraordinary contribution of railways at home and overseas during the war was raw in the memory.

Beyer-Garratt Garratt typically excelled. There were certainly plenty of challenging gradients but without the severity encountered in Africa, Burma and South America. He pointed out that simple expansion plus suspension improvements with the modern Mallet had made operating speeds of 60 mph feasible. There were other markets whose geographic features offered sales potential that was under-exploited, as with India (including present-day Pakistan). Operator policies resulted in an out-dated and lacklustre design for the Ottoman Railway which possibly blighted the type’s reputation to the detriment of selling chances with the Turkish state system. Sales in Soviet Russia suffered from unusual and unique bureaucratic obstacles. Perhaps the greatest disappointment for sales of Garratts lay in South America. Although Williams’s tour of 1926 bore fruit, it was significant that 25 companies spread across seven countries were visited resulting in only nine successful transactions (plus consolidation of the active relationship with the Leopoldina Railway). The shortage of repeat custom was probably due to US competition which had superior local representation. Whether BP could have been more successful by seeking to match this commitment is doubtful. The logistical challenges of speculative sales efforts in so distant and geographically large markets were considerable while the consequences of the Depression of the 1930s destroyed the viability of a sustained calling programme. The later sales that were achieved in South America lacked the critical mass that typified trading in markets such as South Africa, Rhodesia and East Africa.

Garratts appeared on the front cover of several issues of The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review. This edition shows one of the 4-8-2+2-8-4s of Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway at work; Sir Sam Fay was a director of this company.

Intellectual property rights It was normal practice for the manufacturer to provide a full set of drawings to the operator in respect of each new locomotive type sold. This formed an open invitation to exploitation of this information in offering repeat business to competing builders. An example was the case with Western Australian Government Railways in respect of types designed and supplied by Beyer Peacock in the 19th Century:

terrain, they were prevented from fulfilling the proposition that one Garratt could do the work of two conventional locomotives plus a little extra. No further Garratts were sold to FCC but the relationship worked to BP’s ultimate benefit as 49 of Class 40 (or Andes Class) 2-8-0s were supplied between 1936 and 1953. Eight similar locomotives were supplied to Cerro de Pasco Copper Corporation (an industrial mining railway that connected with the FCC) between 1953 and 1957. Works Nos. 7777-9 of the final 1957 batch were the last tender engines built by BP in what had been a classic example of effective ancillary selling techniques stretching over 28 years. The other example of breakdown in pre-sales negotiations concerned the New Zealand venture. Understanding the complexities of that case require all of Chapter 9.

The pre-existing relationship had made WAGR a target customer for Garratts and this proved crucial in early establishment of the type’s technical and commercial credentials. While the copying of other builders’ designs was common practice, this was unacceptable for a novel concept where concomitant investment in research and development had to be recovered. Hence, patent protection formed a crucial element of BP’s corporate policy.

Promotional failures In later years, author OS Nock asked Cyril Williams whether a break into the north American locomotive market had been attempted, based on the South African trials of the early 1920s. Williams responded that despite the sluggish performance and poor riding typical of the compound Mallet, major north American systems lacked the combination of severe curvature, load and structure limitations where the 72

Selling Garratts It had been normal practice by BP to take out a full page advertisement in the Overseas Special issue of the Railway Gazette. This example appeared in 1958 and seems to have been the last Garratt advertisement through this medium.Simon Colbeck Collection

Eighty pages of articles were sandwiched between forty-six pages of advertisements by engineering companies and component suppliers. With a retail price of 6d (2.5 pence in modern money but with immeasurably greater spending power then) and advertising revenue, the publication was probably self-financing. Volume 1 No. 1 appeared in January 1927, followed by issues in April, July and October until July 1931. Volume 5 No. 4 (October 1931) was never issued and publication ceased altogether with the release of Volume 6 No. 2 (July 1932). This interesting publication, pitched at both general and technically-orientated reader, was evidently no longer viable either in the financially-challenged 1930s or in the post-war era.

Concurrent with expiry of the original patent, Cyril Williams raised ethical considerations with South African Railways in 1928 although his position appears to have been weak in view of the timing. Legal protection was only sustainable through further patents related to innovations and new technical features devised by BP. As reviewed in Appendix C, the company was largely successful in protecting its position vis-à-vis the competition. The Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review This publication, an intrinsic part of the company’s sales efforts in the late 1920s/ early 1930s, provided an informative commentary on: -

‘Commercial travellers’ This chapter commenced by illustrating how the circumstances facing private builders differed from those of the UK companies’ locomotive works. CB Collett, Chief Mechanical Engineer of the GWR [1922-41], who seems to have rarely departed mentally from his lair in Fortress Swindon, forbade his subordinates from joining the Institution of Locomotive Engineers which he regarded as a forum for ‘commercial travellers’. This attitude was attributed to his conviction that the UK railway companies’ products were inherently superior to those of private industry. The reader is invited to judge the validity of that view.

locomotive design and development the activities of railway companies and other manufacturers in the UK and overseas, a variety of technical issues countries where locomotives were sold.

As an example, the Review for October 1929 (one of the those that illustrated a Garratt on the front cover) included: -

a survey of the locomotives of the Great Northern Railway of Ireland (a long-term, valued customer) a congratulatory résumé on AG Watson, the newly appointed CME of South African Railways (who ironically would prove antipathetic towards articulated locomotives generally) a further instalment in the description of modern boiler practice a report on the Summer Meeting of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers in Manchester, the text of a lecture by H. Wilmot (Chief Accountant) on ‘The Financial Aspect of Industrial Management’ twenty pages describing the social activities of the company’s employees.

Cyril Williams was elected President of the Institution of Locomotive Engineers in 1949, the first holder of that position to have served his apprenticeship and to have mastered his profession outside the UK. At the Annual Luncheon that year, the High Commissioner for South Africa in proposing the health of the Institution described Cyril Williams as ‘a globe trotter, tireless, purposeful, dynamic and one whose articulateness, like that of the Garratt, has only been exceeded by his mobility’.

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 4 : Before the Great War

Tasmanian Government Railway 0-4-0+0-4-0 Class K consisting of two locomotives was the first Garratt design, dating from 1909 and built for the 2’ 0” gauge NE Dundas tramway. Its superstructure followed the format that would be repeated by the family of locomotives built by BP over succeeding years. However, the arrangement of bogies with the cylinders mounted inboard was unique to this type although this layout was considered in the early planning of Garratts for Western Australian Government Railways. Compound steam was only used for one other Garratt, a member of 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class GAII supplied to Burma Railways in 1927.

Another innovative sales approach was to provide a locomotive on a free trial basis for six months, to be paid for only following the customer’s total satisfaction with the product. Offers on this basis were made to the KalkaSimla Railway, India and to the Antofagasta (Chile) & Bolivia Railway. Neither was accepted but the latter did order six Kitson-Meyer type 2-6-0+0-6-2Ts and would later become a Garratt customer.

nce patent registration had been completed and the contractual arrangements between Herbert Garratt and BP had been signed, development activity and sales promotion became intense. By the end of 1909, over 45 designs had been prepared for four-, six- and eight-coupled power bogies on gauges between 1’ 6” and 5’ 6”. Although out of the mainstream of BP’s intentions, the narrower gauge exercises would have been useful in probing how to fit all the requisite plumbing and control equipment into the confined space between the frames.

Another proposal was for a maximum adhesion eightcoupled type for Central South African Railway (weight 159 tons; 4’ driving wheels; 22” x 26” cylinders; 80,000 lb tractive effort). It would be some years before a locomotive on that scale would be built but at least the exercise showed

Maximum adhesion seems to have been an early objective before the benefits of carrying axles were fully appreciated. Collaboration with friendly neighbours at Gorton Tank saw preparation of an 0-8-0+08-0 design using the chassis design of Great Central Railway Class 8 with driving wheels reduced to 4’ 4”. This wheel arrangement was also adopted in a design proposed to South Manchuria Railway, China. Three locomotives would be built, the first to be on free trial for 2/ 3 months and if satisfactory the other two would be sold at the same price. (In the event, no new Garratt locomotive was ever sold to China). 74

Before the Great War

Drawing of High Pressure Rear Engine Unit for TGR Class K.

NE Dundas Tramway, Tasmanian Government Railways [Gauge 2’ 0”] This 17-mile 2’ 0” gauge tramway connected Zeehan with Deep Lead (now Williamsford) in the remote west coast region of the island state over a route that penetrated thickly wooded hills and deep gorges. Conventional locomotives having proved inadequate, TGR imported 2-6-4-0T No. J1 in 1901. This was a Hagans-type articulated locomotive built by Maschinenfabrik Christian Hagans of Erfurt in the German State of Thuringia. With 2’ 7” driving wheels, 15.75” x 15.75” cylinders and boiler pressure at 195 lb/ sq in, this powerful machine weighed 53 tons and generated tractive effort [75%] of 18,430 lb. However, its weight damaged the lightly constructed track and while articulated power was considered necessary, it was clear that the Hagans principle was inappropriate.

growing recognition at BP of what might be feasible at the upper end of the size spectrum Thirty-one Garratts were completed before 1915 when the war postponed further construction. Their diversity is evident in the Table opposite: Six different wheel arrangements, five gauges, maximum axle loadings varying from less than four to almost 14 tons, and driving wheel diameters from two to five feet amply demonstrated the type’s adaptability. All had four cylinders with the notable exception of two Tasmanian 4-4-2+2-4-4s which were the first express passenger Garratts and the only examples ever with eight cylinders. This variety served notice to the mechanical engineering community that here was an invention of broad applicability. Thus in a little over five years the first Garratts were deployed in Asia, Australia and South America.

Beyer Peacock was a prolific supplier of motive power to Australia around the turn of the century and TGR was a satisfied customer as Gorton Foundry had supplied the following:

The type arrived in strength in Africa after World War 1 although in 1911, four 0-4-0+0-4-0s (60 cm gauge) were supplied to Chemins de Fer Vicinaux du Mayumbe and one 0-6-0+0-6-0 (750 mm gauge) to Compagnie du Chemins de Fer du Congo. These locomotives were built under licence by Société Anonyme de Saint-Léonard of Liége who held exclusive rights to build for service in the Belgian Congo.

Design and supply of an untried concept to operators on other continents must have presented unusual logistical and organisational issues. Commercially, much was at stake in establishing the type’s credibility in the eyes of prospective purchasers so the fortunes of the early locomotives had particular relevance.

2-6-0 Class C Nos. C1 to C28 between 1885 and 1908; some worked until the mid-1960s 4-4-0 Class B Nos. B1 to B15 between 1884 and 1890; most worked until early 1950s 2-4-2T Class D Nos. D1 to D5 between 1891 and 1908; last withdrawn in 1959 4-4-0 Class A Nos. A2 to A9 between 1891 and 1901; several worked until the early 1950s

It was therefore natural to approach a trusted supplier for a possible solution and as described in Chapter 1, Herbert Garratt was on hand to provide his own ideas while 75

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of Tasmanian Government Railway 0-4-0+0-4-0 Class K.

Mallet-derived solutions were also under consideration. In the history of the steam locomotive, there can have been few coincidences with such fortuitous outcome. A purchase decision by an operator in a remote corner of the world to buy a type that existed only on paper would have been considered ‘courageous’ had it not been for the existing commercial relationship. The contact was doubly advantageous as the operator could have approached Kitson who would probably have seized the opportunity to promote a Kitson-Meyer. The later course of articulated locomotive development might then have been quite different.

Australian representative reported to Gorton, following a visit in March 1910. There had been the inevitable teething problems which had been resolved but the engines slipped badly with loads over 50 tons. Weight increase and redistribution was under investigation as the tramway was located in a misty, wet area with perpetually greasy rails. The main criticism was the tendency of the regulator valve to stick. The report concluded with the advice that TGR was sufficiently impressed to be considering Garratts for their 3’ 6” gauge network. The BP representative paid another visit on 1 April 1910 together with WR Deeble (Chief Mechanical Engineer of TGR) and ES Hume, his opposite number on Western Australian Government Railways, who was ‘keenly interested’ in the Garratt. Mr Nairn, the TGR’s Permanent Way Inspector was also present and he opined that the Garratts were less damaging to trackwork than the preceding Hagans locomotive, and also that they were easier on the road than the small Sharp Stewart tank engines, despite the Gorton product’s greater weight. This was early confirmation of the Garratt’s good riding qualities and weight distribution which heralded safe use of much larger machines on indifferent track.

Tasmanian Government Railways placed the order in 1908 and BP’s design took the form of two 0-4-0+0-4-0s numbered K1 and K2 with two distinctive features. They were the only Garratts to have cylinders mounted inboard on the bogies, presumably to minimise the length of the steam passages. This layout proved unsatisfactory as the rear bogie’s cylinders competed for space with the firebox while their position below the cab made working conditions hot. This format was never used again although it was considered in early planning for the first Garratts sold to Western Australia, and in a few design exercises that never proceeded.

A further visit in 1912 revealed that while ball joints continued to remain steam-tight over extended periods there was a tendency for other connections to develop leakages. There were also problems with malfunction of air admission valves in the pipework connecting the cylinder sets. Overall, the pair worked well hauling trains over a difficult line with 1 in 25 gradients and curves as tight as 99’ radius until the system closed down in 1930. For leading Dimensions see opposite.

The Dundas tramway engines were compounds with high pressure cylinders on the rear bogie and low pressure cylinders leading. Compound steam was then a fashionable means of seeking improved performance and lower water/ fuel consumption but its inclusion was probably unwise in a fresh concept. Also, a special valve and pipework were included to admit high pressure steam to the leading cylinders to assist with starting which added to the complexity. Practice would show that compound steam was unnecessary as the layout allowed installation of boilers with excellent steam raising capacity while superheating would off-set possible energy loss in the longer steam passages.

With the tramway’s closure, the two pioneers were stored in the shed at Zeehan until 1947. In that year, Cyril Williams, aware of No. K1’s historic significance, purchased the locomotive for £1,000 on behalf of BP and arranged its shipment to the UK (No. K2 was later sold for scrap). No. K1 was placed on exhibition at Gorton where it remained until run-down of the company. Following a period of uncertainty

The first steaming took place on 17 August 1909 but as the mines served by the tramway were working at reduced capacity, the pair still awaited full testing when BP’s 76

Before the Great War

The Darjeeling Himalaya Railway took delivery of the third Garratt in 1910. At first considered unsuccessful, modifications improved its performance and it remained in service until 1954.

The option of a compound Garratt was tried only once more, with the second engine delivered to Burma Railways in 1927 (2-8-0+0-8-2 Class GAII No 208, works No. 6354). This locomotive also carried its high pressure cylinders on the rear bogie but was otherwise outwardly similar to its simple expansion companions. It showed no discernible advantage in performance. Darjeeling Himalaya Railway [Gauge 2’ 0”] With the honourable exceptions of the Bengal-Nagpur Railway’s impressive fleet and the War Department’s locomotives of the 1940s, Garratts made little impact in the sub-Continent which was surprising considering the strong British connections. This has been attributed in part to the early poor reputation earned by the second design to enter service. The DHR provided challenges similar to those in Tasmania but on a more extreme scale. From Siliguri (altitude 400 feet), over 47 miles the line climbed to 7,400 feet at Choom and then descended over 4 miles to 6,800 feet at Darjeeling. Gradients at 1 in 18 were common and the design had to be capable of coping with 60-foot radius reverse curves and a super elevation on the outer rail of 2½ inches. The length of tangent between the curves could be as short as 20 feet of which only six feet was level. With the leading power bogie tilted laterally to the main body structure, the pivot had to be spherical in shape. The rear pivot remained unchanged but was protected by side bearing surfaces. Further challenges lay in finding room for vacuum brake cylinders, steam pipes and other equipment on both bogies. Apart from decisions to place the cylinders outboard on the bogies and to discard notions of compound steam, tackling the peculiar operational needs must have contributed substantially to BP’s ‘know how’.

it passed into the safe hands of the preservation movement and has since been returned to steam. During this process, it was discovered that several components had originally belonged to No. K2.

The intention was to double the haulage capacity of the famous Class B 0-4-0STs which could handle six laden wagons, each weighing about 5 tons. When introduced, it was found that the Garratt could only manage ten wagons because it was hard to maintain steam pressure. The synchronised exhaust might have produced too much blast and it seems probable that the blastpipe dimensions were inappropriate. This was a problem with other early Garratts, exacerbated by gauge difference preventing exhaustive road tests before despatch from Gorton. The need to optimise 77

Beyer-Garratt

Manufacture and supply of the DHR locomotive was accorded significantly more publicity than had been given to the Tasmanian pair including the publication of the General Arrangement drawing. The DHR was famous for its sinuous route and severe gradients. These official photographs were probably prepared to prove its ability to cope with that railway’s conditions.

boiler/ blastpipe dimensions was given particular attention with the Western Australian engines as described in the next section.

The Darjeeling project evolved during a period of frenetic Garratt promotion including publication of the relevant General Arrangement drawing, which could have proved a costly mistake. Control of Herbert Garratt’s patent provided legal protection against all but blatant plunder of intellectual property. Access to the GA drawing might have helped

An unusual feature of the Darjeeling engine was installation of a third water tank below the centre section solebar immediately in front of the firebox. Herbert Garratt had insisted on certain design features based on his experience and had been concerned to ensure good visibility forward from the cab when working in either direction. His rationale was safety i.e. a good look-out was desirable on routes where obstructions (e.g. fallen trees or rocks) could be a regular hazard. The third tank might have been fitted to reduce the size of that on the leading power bogie. In any event, the front unit was prone to slip when the tank was nearly empty and weight distribution was towards the rear. It has also been suggested that excessive friction at the flanges caused by steep gradients combined with sharp curves might have added to the haulage problem. Mr W Wakefield, the BP employee who had been sent to South Africa to help with assembly of the first Garratts visited the North Western Railway at Lahore in 1922 (presumably regarding delivery of 2-6-2+2-6-2 works No. 6203 to that railway in 1924). He found that the NWR had little understanding of the Garratt principle and that jaundiced opinions had developed, apparently based on reports from Darjeeling. He then visited Mr Kirby, CME of the DHR who reported that his first priority had been to get the Garratt ‘into proper working order’ and that it was now ‘a perfect engine and doing very well’ following quite modest modifications. The Garratt continued at work until 1954 which confirms satisfactory performance. Certainly the progress thus far encouraged the company’s Chairman at BP’s Annual General Meeting in March 1911 to open his remarks on the Garratt design by stating that it was ‘… destined to have a good future, and, as we hope to replace all other types of articulated locomotive…’. 78

Before the Great War competitors’ efforts at legitimate circumvention. The lesson was learned and this was almost the last occasion on which BP published a GA drawing. Western Australian Government Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] Much of Western Australia is arid desert but in the first decade of the 20th Century, the Government devoted considerable effort to expanding wheat production in fertile areas in the south-eastern corner of this vast state. To service a region covering thousands of square miles, a railway network was constructed with light rails, curves as sharp as 328’ radius and gradients as steep as 1 in 22. Trains were heavy during the harvest season so provision of adequate motive power with modest axle loading was a challenge.

The wheel arrangement was judged incompatible with the requisite fuel and water capacities so the specification was changed to 2-4-0+0-4-2s:

Western Australian Government Railways traditionally purchased locomotives from British manufacturers and also from Baldwin. The former included BP which supplied examples of 2-6-0 Class A [between 1875 and 1892]; 2-6-0 & 4-6-0 Class G [1889-1895]; 4-4-0 Class T [1887]. All three classes were designed and built by BP, but later examples were supplied by other manufacturers which indicates that WAGR must have shown BP’s original drawings to competitors in pursuit of better prices. These designs were sound and remained in service until the 1940s/ 50s.

Nothing transpired from these ideas but in October 1910, WAGR approached BP about a six-coupled design that if necessary would incorporate carrying wheels. This led to 2-6-0+0-6-2 Class M. Class M The order for six locomotives was confirmed on 7 March 1911 (works Nos. 5477 to 5482 and WAGR running Nos. 388 to 393). Construction was monitored by WAGR’s UK-based inspecting engineer (EE Salter of Westminster) and testing was conducted on specially laid 3’ 6” track at Gorton which confirmed that the required performance standards could be satisfied so far as was possible over a limited distance. The locomotives arrived in component form at Fremantle in November 1911 and assembly was completed at WAGR’s Midland Junction workshops in early 1912.

ES Hume, Chief Mechanical Engineer, took a particularly close interest in the development of the NE Dundas tramway engines, studied the first two Garratts at work and was in close contact with the CME of Tasmanian Government Railways. Nine months after the first was delivered to Tasmania, WAGR prepared drawings for two examples presumably working off the original BP drawings. One was an 0-4-0+0-4-0 with inboard cylinders as used in Tasmania while the other was a much larger 0-6-0+0-6-0 that would have been twice as powerful. In November 1909 enquiries were lodged with BP for two 0-4-0+0-4-0s with the following key dimensions:

Western Australian Government Railway 2-6-0+0-6-2 Class M as built. Note the jacks on the leading tank, probably in anticipation of difficulties in traversing uneven trackwork on remote country routes. WAGR

Beyer-Garratt

WAGR Class M with a mixed train on the Pinjarra-Dwellingup-Narrogin line on 28 November 1934. W.A. Division Archives

Considerable care was taken in the design to cope with the WAGR’s typical rural conditions. As local water quality was poor, brass boiler tubes were specified. Walschaerts valve gear actuated 6” inside admission piston valves with 3 3/8” travel. The springs were rigged in two compensated groups, firstly the pony axle with the leading driving axle and secondly the two other driving axles. The bogies were pivoted just to the rear of the centre driving axles which helped maintain uniform axle loading regardless of the extent to which tanks and bunker were filled. What became a common Garratt feature was a U-shaped recess in the rear face of the front water tank to provide ample space for opening the smokebox door and also for extraction of boiler tubes without having to lift or remove the tank. Caution was evident in the housing of two regulators side-by-side within

the dome with two control rods extending through the back plate to connect with single hand-lever in the cab. If one power bogie was disabled, the relative control link could be disconnected thereby allowing the locomotive to be moved by the other unit. This must have been considered a useful precaution against the hazards of working in remote districts, far from workshop help. The forward steam pipe passed out through the smokebox in the normal fashion while that for the rear power bogie came back through the firebox into the cab and then down under the footplate to the rear engine pivot. Both steam pipes to the cylinder blocks were linked through ball joints mounted immediately below the bogie pivots to minimise the degree of lateral movement. The reversing screw in the

WAGR Class M No. 390 at Wonnerup. D Finlayson

Before the Great War

Western Australian Government Railway 2-6-0+0-6-2 Class Ms comprising seven locomotives followed closely after Class M of 1911. The second class was fitted with Schmidt superheaters, with a slight reduction in working boiler pressure. Beyer Peacock

cab was connected to the reversing shafts on each power bogie by levers fitted with universal joints, located above the bogie pivots, on the bogie centre line.

Steam sanding was provided on the driving wheels of both bogies and the cylinder cocks were also steam-operated. A mechanical lubricator was fitted adjacent to the front bogie right hand cylinder and another to the rear bogie left hand cylinder. Each supplied eight oil feeds, three to each steam chest and one for each of the flexible steam pipe joints.

Exhaust steam from the rear power bogie passed through a ball joint fitted near the bogie pivot to a pipe that connected with the exhaust pipe in the smokebox. Exhaust from the front power bogie was connected to the pipe by means of sleeved tubes and a universal joint. This duplex arrangement was carefully set up so that the two exhausts were concentric and equal in cross-sectional area thereby maintaining a uniform draught in all conditions without one power unit interfering with the rhythm of the other.

Although the specially laid track at Gorton provided the means of proving the ensemble’s ability to cope with curvature and gradient change, there was no facility to confirm boiler performance through running trials over extended distances. Theoretically, the boiler’s form would be an efficient steam raiser but incorrect blastpipe dimensions could negate much of the advantage. Accordingly, each of the six locomotives was fitted with a different size and style of blast pipe nozzle for comparative road tests on BP’s behalf. Between May and July 1912, each of these blastpipes was fitted to locomotive No. 390 for testing over a six-day period. The same load was hauled on consecutive days between Midland Junction and Chidlow (a one-way distance of about 25 miles). Coal and water consumption were carefully averaged over the six-day period for each

The Belpaire firebox was equipped with rocking bars and the ashpan, free of the constraints imposed by the presence of wheels, was generously proportioned. The boiler was shorter and fatter than would normally be feasible on a rigid-framed engine thus realising a key advantage of the concept. Two Gresham and Craven non-lifting hot water type injectors were installed. Both power units were fitted with combined vacuum and hand screw brakes that operated concurrently.

Diagram issued for Western Australian Government Railway 2-6-0+0-6-2 Classes M/ Ms.

Beyer-Garratt

In contrast to the minimal publicity that accompanied introduction of the WAGR Garratts, the 3’ 6” gauge quartet supplied to Tasmanian Government Railways in 1912 entered traffic with much fanfare although the length of their working lives was shorter. Class L was the first example of the 2-6-2+2-6-2 wheel arrangement which although probably unrecognised at the time, reduced flange wear on the inside driving wheel flanges. In due course, this would become a popular wheel arrangement. Science Museum

Class Ms Validation of the effectiveness of Class M was almost immediate with all six in service by 6 April 1912. A second batch comprising seven locomotives was ordered that year. They differed in having Schmidt superheaters and reduced boiler pressure, a combination that was applied in the transition from saturated to superheated steam elsewhere at that time. Only one regulator was fitted and a single steam pipe from the dome connected with the superheater header. The main steam pipe divided at the bottom of the smokebox to feed the front and rear cylinder blocks. Oil was injected into the main steam pipes at the flexible joints. Isolating valves were fitted to close off either steam pipe in the event of failure and snifting valves admitted saturated steam to both steam chests when drifting. A steam piston mounted in the smokebox operated louvred plates which blocked off the draft from the superheater flues when the regulator was closed to prevent burning the flues. The

blastpipe. Based on the lowest coal per ton-mile recorded, the ‘Medium Star’ nozzle with a cross sectional area of 17 square inches proved the most efficient and this was specified for the follow-up order. The genesis and introduction of these six locomotives went virtually unnoticed with the briefest mention in the technical press, and without public comment in Western Australia. This muted reception must largely account for their lack of recognition as a keystone in the Garratt story. As the first examples of the genre built for 3’ 6” gauge, the first with sixcoupled power bogies, and the first with carrying wheels, at a stroke they embraced essential features that would recur over following years. Further, an order for six where normal caution would dictate one or two experimental prototypes demonstrated considerable faith by both manufacturer and operator who co-operated closely to considerable mutual benefit.

TGR Class M was introduced concurrently with Class L and the superstructure of the two types was similar. Below the running plate the differences were marked as the two members of Class M were the only the eight cylinder examples of the genre, and the first attempt at an express passenger Garratt . However, their working lives were short. Science Museum

Before the Great War standard form of WAGR steam snifter later replaced this equipment. The second order underlined the success of the saturated version and Nos. 424-429 (works Nos. 5665-5670) entered service with WAGR in September/ October 1913. The final member of the batch (BP works No. 5671) started work with the State Saw Mills but proving too heavy for bush tramways, it was transferred to become WAGR No 430 in June 1914. The superheated version was considered to be the better steamer and comparative tests in February 1914 revealed a saving of 31% in coal and 19% in water consumption. Also, the saturated version’s elapsed journey times were between 18 and 36 minutes greater due to stoppages either for raising steam or to take on water. The mechanical lubricators were later replaced with the hydrostatic type and bunker sides were raised to add one ton to the coal capacity. Class M No. 389 was superheated in April 1935 and became a member of Class Ms. No other modifications were deemed necessary and both classes worked their entire careers over the lightly laid rural lines for which they had been built. Considering their pioneering nature, they were a notable success and must have instilled considerable confidence in proving the Garratt’s potential. Class M was withdrawn between September 1947 and November 1951; Class Ms was taken out of service between September 1947 and May 1953. In 1930, WAGR Midland Junction workshops built ten examples of 2-6-0+0-6-2 Class Msa, a development of Class Ms. There was substantial redesign of boiler and cylinders but the M/ Ms frame and chassis formats were retained. They proved less economical to work than Class Ms but became the mainstay heavy goods motive power over rural routes until mass withdrawal in 1963. They were the first Garratts built in the Southern Hemisphere and BP played no direct part in their design and construction. Midland Junction also built ten examples of the 4-8-2+2-8-4 Australian Standard Garratt in 1943/ 4 as mentioned in Chapter 11. The leading dimensions of Classes M and Ms:

Tasmanian Government Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] The effectiveness of the pair on the NE Dundas Tramway encouraged TGR to adopt the type for its 3’ 6” gauge network where conditions were not as extreme as on the 2’ 0” line but nonetheless demanding by virtue of the island’s terrain. In contrast with WAGR’s quiet approach to its new investments, TGR chose widely to advertise its acquisitions. BP’s high quality manufacturing standards provided a basis for optimism but could not guarantee against the risk implicit in an as yet fully proven concept.

Three-quarter view of TGR Class M. Science Museum

Beyer-Garratt Four locomotives were ordered in 1912, two were classified L and pioneered the 2-6-2+2-6-2 wheel arrangement which would become popular after the Great War. Intended for freight work, they had no other features that in design terms set them aside from the preceding WAGR Class M. However, the other two Tasmanian engines were like nothing that would be seen again from BP or any other manufacturer. TGR Class M comprised 8-cylinder 4-4-2+2-4-4s, intended for express passenger duties. TGR had recently introduced corridor coaches on its longer distance services which yielded a significant increase in train weights and the need for more powerful engines.

following alterations steamed ‘remarkably freely’, and drew little ash into the smokebox despite the absence of spark arresters, with superheat up to 650O F. He reported that the original smokebox features as installed by BP prevented maintenance of adequate steam pressure even with the injector closed. When opened pressure fell when climbing gradients necessitating stops to restore steam pressure and water levels with the highest recorded superheat at about 500O F. York’s work was important for several reasons. Superheating was still in its infancy and the Schmidt organisation was then the main repository of technical information on the subject. A generic problem facing commercial manufacturers engaged in export sales was in the inability to conduct extensive pre-delivery road trials in the manner that was possible with a UK manufacturer supplying the home market. Further, although care had been taken in testing various blastpipe configurations on WAGR Class M, those locomotives were saturated so superheating had been omitted from that equation. Schmidt’s commercial interests would have ensured that York’s findings were reported back to BP to assist in improvement of what was still a novel concept.

In style of superstructure the two classes were smilar with interchangeable boilers. One notable difference was that with Class M, the leading and rear tanks had arches over the motion (“hole-in-the wall” style) for access purposes. This feature was repeated in 1925 with LNER 2-8-0+0-8-2 six-cylinder Class U1 for the same purpose but curiously omitted on the only other multi-cylinder design, New Zealand Railways 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class G. Both classes suffered steaming problems at first but matters were improved by modifications to the blast pipe, chimney and superheater. RS York of the Schmidt Superheating Company Ltd reported in December 1913 that three engines

On introduction, Class L was the most powerful type in Australia and an improvement over preceding TGR Class E 4-6-0T which was converted to 4-6-0 due to its excessive weight. This was another early demonstration of the Garratt’s capacity to operate over lightly laid track where axle loading would otherwise present difficulties. The 2-6-0+0-6-2s were allocated to Launceston from where they worked freight trains to Hobart, the state capital. Occasionally during motive power shortages, they handled passenger services over this route. TGR introduced 4-8-2 Class Q in 1922 which eventually totalled 19 examples so that by 1929 Class L was virtually redundant leading the following year to withdrawal and storage. In 1943, heavy traffic levels saw their reinstatement and they worked until 1945. They were then withdrawn for good, having been replaced by a batch of Australian Standard Garratts. With both engines enjoying an aggregate working life of about 20 years, they could be considered to have made a useful contribution although not on the scale of their Western Australian compatriots. The double Atlantics of Class M were spectacular machines but had shorter careers. Built to operate daytime express passenger trains between Hobart and Launceston, they recorded high speeds with a maximum authenticated of 88 kph which was unprecedented for any form of 3’ 6” gauge articulated engine. The local press was fulsome in its praise of the type’s speed and haulage capacities. Later, they were also used on return night mail services between Launceston and Anthill Ponds. On the negative side, they were reported to suffer from a measure of instability although a derailment was attributed to smooth running which misled the driver over the locomotive’s actual speed. Maintenance must have been difficult when needing to reach the connecting rods in the limited space between the frames, due to the narrow 84

Before the Great War gauge. The inside valves were actuated by rocking levers set in front of the outside valves and linked through rectangular holes in the frames. The cylinders were in line and all connected with the first driving axle. Quite why such an exotic design was deemed necessary does not seem to have been adequately explained. Their role as prime passenger motive power started to decline with the introduction of four members of 4-6-2 Class R in 1923.

A third party evaluation of TGR’s 3’ 6” gauge Garratts was provided through the report of a visiting Locomotive Inspector from New Zealand Railways in 1914. The longstanding need for larger locomotives to work the North Island Main Trunk route had been frustrated by axle loading constraints, necessitating undue reliance on double-heading. The Garratts in Western Australia and Tasmania stimulated enquiries into the possibility of the type providing a solution to these difficulties. It was reported that Class L was more highly regarded than the double-Atlantics. The visitor had been particularly impressed during a 13-mile test run on a Class L from Launceston when 264 tons were hauled in 45 minutes at speeds up to 30 mph. It was noted that the engine had been ‘balanced’ for an optimal speed of 25 mph and that some oscillation was experienced when running faster. Steaming was good and the ride comfortable over a twisting route.

Apart from the curiosity factor, Class M was significant as the first express passenger Garratt, a locomotive category that would re-appear in later years on other continents although in limited numbers. No. M2 reputedly worked until 1931 but lingered on in store until 1953 when eventually cut up by a Sydney scrap dealer. No. M1 lasted in service on TGR until 1923 when it was sold to Mount Lyell Mining and Railway Company, located in the western coastal region of the state. It was apparently sold for scrap; that company’s railway was over 20 miles long with some steeply graded sections. A large-wheeled, four-coupled, eight-cylinder Garratt would hardly have been suitable for such a system.

The engine was liked by its crews, working parts’ accessibility was good, and repair costs were reasonable compared with conventional locomotives. On the negative side, certain aspects of the design were considered antiquated

BP apparently canvassed its new product across its existing client base which helps explain the sales in 1912 of two saturated 4-6-0+0-6-4s to the Mogyana Railway in Brazil. This British-owned company had been a consistent customer for freight and passenger 4-6-0s over several years so the articulated option would have made sense in terms of interchangeability of components. Science Museum

The success of the two Garratts supplied in 1912 led to three more with superheaters in 1915. No. 189 of this batch shows virtually no external change from the earlier engines. The wheel arrangement was unusual and it was only repeated on a pair of Garratts supplied to Ferrocarriles Nacionale de Colombia by a competitor. Science Museum

Beyer-Garratt

Map of São Paulo Railway system.

The 5’ 3” gauge Sao Paulo Railway of Brazil which was also British-owned in 1913 acquired 2-6-0+0-6-2 Class U No. 8 to work the 3’ 0” gauge Bragantina branch.

Before the Great War when compared with prevailing NZR standards and it was opined that wherever possible parts should be manufactured to drawings prepared at the workshops in Wellington. It was recommended that a specification based on TGR Class L would be ideally suited to conditions in the North Island. As related in Chapter 9, when the NZ Garratt project commenced over ten years later, the findings of this report were evidently ignored, to the ultimate detriment of both NZR and BP. Mogyana Railway, Brazil [Metre gauge] (Cia. Mogiana des Estradas de Ferro) This railway was an important system whose network was mainly located in the wealthy coffee-producing north-east of Sao Paulo state with some branches penetrating neighbouring Minas Gerais state. BP had started to provide the railway with tender locomotives in 1891 and by 1912 twenty-one goods 4-6-0s, six passenger 4-4-0s, three simple passenger 4-6-0s and twenty-one compound passenger 4-6-0s were in service. These acquisitions proved satisfactory and a significant number were still at work after World War 2 with three of the 4-6-0s reported as preserved in the early 1970s. This history helps explain why the first Garratts delivered to South America had the unusual 4-6-0+0-6-4 wheel arrangement. The first two engines delivered in 1912 had saturated boilers with Belpaire fireboxes, slide valves, and plate frames. Three more of the same wheel arrangement followed in 1915; they were externally similar but more modern in design with superheated boilers and piston valves. That was to prove the extent of the railway’s Garratt investment but apparently all five remained in service until after World War 2 although their disposal details are unknown. In the early 1920s, recognition that

Sao Paulo Railway No. 8 proved so satisfactory that when additional articulated power was needed for the Bragantina branch in 1936, Class V No. 12 was supplied which in all major dimensions conformed with the earlier engine. Refinements had been introduced over the intervening years but these were considered unnecessary in meeting the specific demands of this route.

Beyer-Garratt inboard trailing axles reduced flange wear on the innermost driving wheels meant that BP built no more engines with this wheel arrangement. These engines proved successful. They were quickly assembled at the railway’s workshops which spoke volumes for BP’s engineering quality standards and within a week, the first was at work hauling a 185-ton freight train with ease. Intended for mixed traffic work, they soon proved competent on passenger duties over difficult routes with operating speeds up to 60 kph. Heavy initial coal and water consumption was attributed to the crew’s lack of familiarity with the type. The boiler was free steaming and it is apparent that earlier problems with blastpipe dimensions had been overcome. The later superheated version proved even more proficient. While withdrawal dates have not been traced, it seems probable that all enjoyed working careers of over 35 years. There was a regrettable consequence to this early success as when Cyril Williams toured South America in the 1920s, he discovered that BP had lost the initiative with this operator as later purchases had been Mallets. There was considerable potential for Garratt usage but this was never fulfilled on the scale achieved in Africa. São Paulo Railway, Brazil [Gauges metre & 5’ 3”] (Estrada de Ferro Santos a Jundiai) Nationalised in 1946, this British-owned system (nicknamed Ingleza ie ‘The English’) was predominantly 5’ 3” gauge and played an important role in the Brazilian coffee industry. The SPR’s mainline which ran from Santos on the coast via São Paulo to Jundiaí was worked in three sections. The first 12 miles traversed flat country to Piaçaguera near Cubatão. Then followed five miles of steep gradient worked originally as a cable railway powered by stationary steam engines and from 1974 as an electrified rack-and-adhesion system. The upper section crossed the plateau to Jundiaí and operated as a conventional railway. There was also a metre gauge line known as the Bragantina branch from Campo Limpo on the main line to Vangem and Praciai with gradients as steep as 1 in 30 and curves as severe as 365 ft radius.

been introduced over the intervening years. Both engines were known to have been at work on the branch in 1945 and it is speculated that they may have remained there until closure in 1967. Class Q [Gauge 5’ 3”] BP’s second passenger Garratt design was as unusual as had been the Tasmanian double Atlantics. The coastal section of the Sao Paulo Railway’s mainline had been very lightly constructed with weak bridges. The need was for haulage of trains weighing up to 1000 tons, subject to a maximum axle loading of 14 tons. An eight-coupled rigid-framed locomotive would have been too heavy but by employing a Garratt with four-coupled power bogies, the weight was spread across an overall wheelbase of 47’ 10”.

Classes U & V [Metre gauge] In 1911, the company had purchased two 4-6-0s from BP (works Nos. 5518/9, running Nos. 6/ 7) and possibly influenced by the experience of the Mogyana Railway, chose to acquire a single Garratt to work this difficult route. Ordered in 1912, classified U and numbered 8, this timberburning locomotive proved entirely satisfactory. It was economical to operate in hauling 270 tons while consuming 40 lb of fuel per mile whereas the best each of the preceding 4-6-0s could manage was 120 tons at 36 lb per mile. CR Hillman, Locomotive Superintendent, was delighted with this performance.

When completed, it was discovered that each locomotive was two tons heavier than the agreed specification. The civil engineer declined their acceptance on the grounds that the two weakest bridges were incapable of safely bearing such a load. Hillman circumvented this injunction by reducing water and coal capacities which measures adversely affected operations as they enforced a water stop mid-way during a short journey over a busy route. Train loads were restricted to 50 wagons rather than the 70 limit originally planned. This was a classic example of the

To meet growing traffic demands, almost identical Class V No. 12 was delivered in 1936. Apart from some minor changes, No 12 was a time warp as it typified early Garratt designs and took no account of the improvements that had 88

Before the Great War

Weak bridge structures rather than adverse gradients on the 5’ 3” gauge coastal section of the São Paulo Railway was the reason for the three members of 2-4-0+0-4-2 Class Q. These engines which at over 80 tons were significantly larger than they appeared in photographs revealed another Garratt advantage in the ability to spread weight over a considerable length. Had it not been for the bridges, a sturdy 2-8-0 would probably have satisfied operating needs. These engines spent their entire careers shuttling back and forth over a comparatively short section. Their 5’ 0” driving wheels reflected frequent use on passenger services although they also worked freight trains, reportedly weighing up to 1000 tons. The absence of severe gradients allowed this design to be effective despite a high factor of adhesion which exceeded 5.

One of the unusual São Paulo 2-4-0+0-4-2s at work.

Beyer-Garratt São Paulo Railway

Arakan Light Railway Burma

§ Another source states fuel capacity as 700 gallons which suggests that they were converted to oil-burners later in their career.

1916, the locomotives were restored to their original carrying capacities and train loads were increased to 70 wagons maximum.

triangular debate between optimised locomotive design, the traffic manager’s operating requirements and the civil engineer’s conservatism. There seems to have been no thought of strengthening the offending bridges, the cost of which could have been recovered through improved working efficiency of the railway as a whole. This situation anticipated a key element in the Garratt’s effectiveness in permitting large locomotives to work over relatively fragile or under-engineered trackwork and infrastructure.

Class Q Nos. 110-2 were the last Garratts built before World War 1 interrupted production and were distinctive in their 2-4-0+0-4-2 wheel arrangement. They were fitted with plate frames, superheater, piston valves, Belpaire firebox and Walschaerts valve gear but were designed to burn timber. Despite their large driving wheels, they were competent in what was mixed traffic service. The trio spent their entire careers efficiently shuttling back and forth over their 12-mile section, engaged in both passenger and freight haulage. The sectional locomotive superintendent reported that in 25 years of working with the railway, he had never had to deal with such fine engines as these three Garratts. They were withdrawn in 1950, following dieselisation.

However, Hillman won the argument when it was pointed out that tests revealed more deflection at the centre of the bridge with a fully laden 40-ton wagon than was exerted by a Garratt at its original weight. Once confirmed in April 90

Before the Great War company’s liquidators by the Indian Government in 1926 and then closed. The two Garratts, apparently the only motive power, were abandoned and left to rot. These were the smallest Garratts built by BP. Timber burners, they were fitted with slide valves and water was carried in three tanks: front bogie (260 gallons), rear bogie (130), and in a well beneath the boiler (160). Named No. 1 Buthidaung and No 2 Maungdaw, they appeared quite prominently in BP’s promotional literature, probably because their small size demonstrated the breadth of Garratt principle. Summary These early developmental histories illustrate the These minuscule 0-6-0+0-6-0s built for use on the 2’ 6” emergence of key principles that would be embedded gauge Buthidaung-Maungdaw Tramway were BP’s smallest Garratts. The BMT had a short operating life which seems to in the type, and in the diverse adverse circumstances under which it would operate. This group’s variety in have lasted six or seven years. style, gauge and size underlined the intrinsic qualities of Herbert Garratt’s idea, as developed and matured by Beyer Peacock. The process confirmed to the company that here lay the seeds of the new product line to offArakan Light Railway, Burma [Gauge 2’ 6”] Maximum adhesion Garratts were uncommon and the set the trading uncertainties of the first decade of the 20th two ordered by Arakan Flotilla Co Ltd in 1913 to work the Century, as discussed in Chapter 1. Buthidaung-Maungdaw Tramway in Burma were the only six-coupled examples built by BP. They were also the only In 1915 the progress achieved through a remarkably varied tramway-type Garratts built by the company and Herbert group of locomotives was placed on pause for the duration Garratt was involved in this project, probably through his of World War 1. Experience had established the viability of sales promotion efforts and possibly in the design process. the Garratt concept but endorsement was needed through In this respect, he had definitely visited Belgium in 1911 to a major operator’s acceptance. With restoration of peace, monitor trials with the first 0-6-0+0-6-0 tramway engine that would soon come and on the continent with which the built under licence by Société St Léonard for 750 mm gauge Garratt would be most prominently associated – Africa. Compagnie du Chemins de Fer du Congo. In 1916 Martin & Co of Calcutta formed the Arakan Light Railway Co Ltd to take over the tramway venture which apparently did not open for traffic until 1919. The route had a short life as the assets were purchased from the

Drawing of ButhidaungMaungdaw Tramway locomotive.

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 5 : Garratt versus the rest

Probably the first articulated type to achieve commercial viability was the Double Fairlie, the patent for which was taken out in 1863 by Robert Fairlie. Thirteen British and European commercial manufacturers built examples plus numerous railway company workshops between 1865 and 1911. This example was produced by Vulcan Foundry Ltd in 1911 for the Mexican Railway which was a leading user of the type, as was also the Trans-Caucasian Railway in Russia. This photograph highlights some of the type’s disadvantages as with division of the cab longitudinally by the double adjacent fireboxes which physically separated driver and fireman. Coal was carried in bunkers on the fireman’s side and water in tanks on the other. Carrying capacities were thus limited, as was also the maximum feasible size of the engine. For all the concept’s ingenuity, the general format militated against significant enlargement and by the 20th Century, the type was obsolescent. This was one of three supplied in 1911, the last and also the largest to be sold to Mexico.

eyer, Peacock & Co. Ltd published a booklet titled The British Locomotive Industry which contained reproductions of ‘Editorial Articles’ that had appeared in The Daily Telegraph between 27 February and 6 March 1927. The fourth instalment recounted the history of the type from first contact with Herbert Garratt in 1907, summarised its potential, and reviewed the associated licensing arrangements. The piece included the following significant passage:

outside. Further, this dimensional generosity allows a large firebox of simple form with matching draughting through the ashpan. Optimised combustion rates across a range of fuels of varying calorific value thus underwrote universal applicability. Many Garratts worked in mountainous regions with acute gradient variations. The shorter tube length bestowed yet another advantage in reducing risk of exposing either the boiler crown at the firebox, or the upper tubes at the leading end through sudden angle changes in the vertical plane i.e. during gradient ascent and descent. This factor prevented use of large Mallets with their long boilers in some parts of Natal, South Africa.

The primary object was … the construction of locomotives in which a boiler of proportions adequate to the power required … [which] cannot be introduced into any orthodox types... This is rendered possible by the novel arrangement adopted whereby the boiler is mounted in a long frame carried at each end by …. a complete power unit. The ability to spread total weight, reduce axle loadings, combine two locomotives typified popular arguments in the Garratt’s favour. However, uninhibited by wheels below the central section, the boiler’s cross-sectional dimensions are constrained only by the loading gauge thus rendering the same area of heating surface area in a vessel that is significantly shorter and fatter than is geometrically possible with a conventional rigid-framed locomotive, a Mallet, a traditional Meyer/ Kitson-Meyer, or a double Fairlie. A higher number of shorter tubes reduces evaporative deterioration further away from the firebox where insulation becomes less effective in arresting heat conductivity to the

The timing of The Daily Telegraph articles was strange, suggesting burgeoning confidence in a concept despite imminent loss of patent protection. The message was closely akin to generic advertising which advances public awareness and acceptance of a product type rather than the manufacturer’s own particular brand. As described below, North British Locomotive Co had already launched a challenge that circumvented the patent and others would soon follow.

South African Railways The instant effectiveness of the Western Australian locomotives before the Great War had demonstrated the concept’s potential. However, the muted nature of their

Garratts versus the rest introduction and their deployment in remote rural locations detracted from broad recognition of their competence, a modesty that contrasted with the promotional ‘ballyhoo’ of later years. Substantial sales progress required a mainstream operator’s endorsement and that came through South African Railways.

mid-1970s, a longevity that spoke volumes. Hendrie could thus be regarded as the father of the large British 20th Century steam locomotive and his sponsorship of Mallets was a logical progression. Some operators were already familiar with articulated steam, and its drawbacks. Cape Government Railways acquired two 0-6-6-0 Double Fairlies in 1876/ 8 which worked until 1903, suggesting that they were satisfactory but insufficiently so for multiplication. The same company acquired an 0-6-60 Kitson-Meyer in 1903 following promotion by Kitson & Co. Used on the climb inland from East London, it proved capable of hauling loads 30% greater than the largest conventional locomotive but was a poor steamer. This was attributed to the expulsion of exhaust steam from the rear cylinders through a chimney set in the bunker thus making no contribution to smokebox vacuum. The locomotive weighed 83 tons while water carried in a separate tender accounted for another 38 tons. Modifications slightly improved performance but it was out of service by 1908. None of these machines offered a basis for advancement.

Accounts of this stage in the Garratt story focus on ascendancy over SAR’s Mallet fleet but the sequence of events indicates a complicated path in achievement of acceptance. The principal player in the early days was David A Hendrie, one of the finest yet least recognised of British locomotive engineers of the 20th Century. Born in Inverness in 1861, he joined the Highland Railway as an engineering pupil in June 1879 and after completing his apprenticeship, became a draughtsman with that company followed by a period as a leading draughtsman with Sharp, Stewart & Co, Glasgow and then a two-year spell with Dübs & Co. He returned to the HR in 1893 as Assistant Locomotive Superintendent in succession to GW Reid who had moved to Natal Government Railways. Hendrie led design of the ‘Jones Goods’, introduced in 1894 as Britain’s first 4-6-0 but hopes of further advancement were dashed when he was passed over in favour of the apparently less talented Peter Drummond.

Hendrie visited the United States in 1909 to study contemporary practice, leading NGR to take delivery that year of an experimental 2-6-6-0 compound Mallet built by American Locomotive Company (ALCO). The Mallet was a considerable improvement over preceding articulated types and this example embodied several modern features except for its saturated boiler. The largest locomotive in South Africa, its main duty was banking heavy coal trains over the steeply graded 28 miles between Estcourt and Highlands on the Natal main line. Tests revealed its inability to run at higher speeds, reportedly due to its long, tortuous steam

Hendrie left the Highland and followed Reid as Locomotive Superintendent of Natal Government Railways in 1903. A year later he stunned the engineering world by ordering fifty examples of 4-8-0 Class B (later SAR Class 1) straight from the drawing board at a time when enlargement was being cautiously explored elsewhere. Built by North British Locomotive Co, they remained in front line service until the

The Meyer type first appeared at the Semmering Locomotive Competition of 1851 organised by the Austrian Government to stimulate motive power solutions for mountainous railway routes. In simple terms, the Meyer was a conventional tank locomotive mounted on a pair of power bogies with the cylinders mounted inboard. L’ Avenir was a standard gauge 0-4+0-4T built in 1868 for direct comparison with conventional rigid-framed 0-8-0Ts. This drawing, published in 1872 reveals an endemic problem presented by the position of rear bogie which competed for space with the firebox and grate. Engineering

Beyer-Garratt

Articulated power became well established in South America in the form of Mallets and Meyers. There were several variants of the latter type including the Kitson-Meyer which was developed by Kitson & Company of Leeds in the 1890s. With this type, the rear power bogie was reversed and located further back to clear the ashpan, and to increase the bunker capacity. This configuration permitted a larger firebox is one of the advantages embedded in the Garratt, although it was not possible to install a short, fat boiler. South America was a target market for BP although sales success required tackling well-entrenched competition. Promotional efforts to sell Garratts to Antofagasta (Chili) & Bolivia Railway resulted in an order for six 0-6-2+0-6-2s of the Kitson-Meyer type in 1913 (works Nos. 5617-22) as depicted. These were the only non-Garratt articulated locomotives built by BP. Persistence paid off as BP sold three 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts (works Nos. 6524-6) in 1929 to this railway, and six more in 1950 (works Nos. 7420-5).

passages. On formation of South African Railways in 1912, this engine became Class MA No. 1601. Five more Mallets followed from ALCO in 1910, later classified MB Nos. 16026. Similar to No. 1601 except for a slightly larger boiler and greater water capacity, they were also used as bankers.

these duties, it remained a singleton although its presence recognised that conditions on secondary routes justified articulated power. Further, it was unique among the CSAR types in having simple expansion. The single example of Class MG had the curiosity of 4’ 3” diameter driving wheels on the leading unit and 3’ 10” on the rear. The intention was apparently to improve acceleration by superior traction at the rear while enhancing steam flow by means of more even pressure in the receiver pipes through differing frequency of exhaust beats. There was also a theory that higher operating speeds might be possible. Exactly how these advantages were to be achieved

Central South African Railways (CSAR) followed the NGR initiative during 1910-12 with a broadly similar approach. Four Mallet types were acquired of which three were single experimental machines while the fourth comprised a class of fourteen. SAR classified them in the “M” series as MD/ ME/ MF/ MG. Together with those built later for SAR, by 1918 the fleet had grown to 79 locomotives:-

Two of the ex-CSAR types were particularly noteworthy. Class ME was intended for branch work as indicated by the modest total weight and axle loading. Despite success on

is unclear; road performance proved inferior to that of Class MF. 94

Garratts versus the rest

Side drawing and plan of a compound Mallet 0-6-6-0T which shows the steam passage to the leading engine unit. The larger cylinders mounted at the front generated considerable reciprocating forces that destabilised the semiarticulated section and limited the type’s safe working speed.

During the war years, demand for more powerful locomotives was pressing on the Natal main line and over the Hex River Pass between De Aar and Cape Town. Both routes involved severe gradients and sharp curves for which the principal motive power was Hendrie’s 4-8-2 14th Class and SAR’s largest Mallet type, its Class MH. The latter hauled freight trains and banked passenger services.

During 1915, a third design had been commenced in the form of a lighter Cape Gauge engine as a 2-6-2+2-6-2 which was completed in March 1921. The order details: Gauge Order Works Class Running Introduced No. No. No. 3' 6" 941 5941 GA 1649 1920 3' 6" 942 5942 GB 1650 1921 2' 0" 1060 5975-7 NG/G11 51-4 1919

With Hendrie’s commitment to the Mallet, it is unclear how he was persuaded to consider Garratts but discussions were in hand in 1914. It seems that initial interest focussed on the needs of the 2’ 0” gauge system, and secondarily on Cape gauge possibilities. Garratt expert Joe Lloyd’s records imply that the narrow gauge order was placed in 1914 with the intention to complete three 2-6-0+0-6-2s by May 1916. This objective was delayed by the war and they were eventually finished in November 1919. Preparatory work had also started in 1915 on a 3’ 6” 2-6-0+0-6-2 which was completed in November 1920 with a weight of 133.85 tons, a substantial increase over the heaviest pre-war design, Tasmanian Government Railways Class M at 94.55 tons.

BP employee, W Wakefield, was attached to SAR to supervise assembly and once the narrow gauge engines were completed, he tackled Class GA No. 1649 which entered service in February 1921. Two senior SAR officers had been assigned to work with him but when he requested a more junior assistant, Cyril Williams was given the task. Having briefed Williams on the nature of the tests and how to conduct them, Wakefield stood aside as the results would be more credible if conducted solely by SAR personnel. Three established SAR types were compared against the 95

Beyer-Garratt

Lest it be thought that the plan of the Mallet shown in the previous illustration was an exaggeration, here is Baldwinbuilt [1926] 2-6-6-2T No. 50 negotiating the curve at Moro Castle on the central section of the 3’ gauge Uintah Railway Co. This railway (known as the ‘Gilsonite’ line) operated in rugged mountainous country in Colorado/ Utah USA with severe gradients and tortuous curves. At this point the locomotive is tackling the curve whose radius was clearly extremely tight on a 1 in 12.5 gradient which reduced speed to walking pace. A second 2-6-6-2T was supplied in 1928 and the pair replaced Type B Shays on the central section of this 63-mile long railway.

Garratt and the relevant weights, heating surfaces, nominal tractive effort etc were:

uncomplimentary remarks about the Mallet which Hendrie failed to appreciate. The CME tended to be regarded as God-like figures in those days and maybe these comments ignited reticence about the Garratt. Nevertheless, the GA’s fuel consumption rate matched that of the 14th Class while hauling 100 tons more in train load. Williams supervised evaporation tests on 14 and 16 April 1921 over the 44.35 miles between Durban and Cato Ridge. The latter point is 2,470 ft above sea level although most of the climb is in the 27 miles between South Coast Junction and Botha‘s Hill. The average gradient is about 1 in 58 but there were stretches at 1 in 30, one of which included a 300-ft radius curve. The first test results were discounted because of problems with a sticking by-pass valve but the second test results were promising. The load was 325 tons carried on 42 axles; weather conditions were fine; the rails were dry and there was no need to use sand. On 1 in 30 gradients the engine was worked at 50-55% cut-off with one short spell at 60%.

The first test employed classes 14th and MC1, the latter probably because of its dimensional similarity to the Garratt but it was later replaced by the larger Class MH. How the MC1 performed has not been traced but it apparently fell short of what the GA achieved. Apparently Williams’s enthusiasm over-rode his discretion in making some 96

Garratts versus the rest

This view of Erie Railroad “Camelback” compound Mallet 0-8-8-0 Class L No 2601 illustrates the degree of progress achieved in the USA around the time that the Garratt type entered the market. This engine has a Wootten firebox designed to extract maximum steaming performance from low grade coal and even slag. Built before mechanical stokers were introduced, there were two fire doors which were tended by a pair of stokers who rode on the rear footplate, adjacent to the tender. The engineer was divorced from his colleagues on the forward footplate mounted between and above the two power units. Wootten-equipped locomotives of that period operated with economy regarding fuel costs, albeit at the expense of heavy manual labour. The reasons for confinement of Mallets in this form to slow speed freight haulage, heavy switching or helping duties are readily apparent.

The journey was covered in 183.5 minutes of which 71.5 were expended in standing at stations. Good quality Enyati coal was used with calorific value 12,500 to 13,000 BTUs [ash – 10%; volatile – 19%; fixed carbon – 71%; moisture – 1%]. The engine steamed freely, the grate

remained undisturbed and consumption was measured at 32 lb per square foot of grate per hour which was low by contemporary SAR standards. A shallow fire was maintained throughout with an even draw, and only small amounts of fine ash passed through the tubes. The low velocity at which

SAR 2-6-6-2 Class MH Mallet No. 1661 of the type that was the principal contestant against Garratt Class GA. Mallet supporters sought to decry the Garratt on the grounds that it was a glorified tank engine whose adhesive weight reduced as fuel and water was consumed. However, this argument was flimsy when compared with the Mallet tender which contributed nothing to adhesion, full or empty, but added to the dead weight.

Beyer-Garratt

A Garratt in plan which demonstrates the type’s flexibility and the critically important minimisation of overhang which helped ensure excellent riding qualities.

SAR 2-6-0+0-6-2 Class GA No. 1620 (later No. 2140) was the first Cape Gauge Garratt on that system and soon tested against a 2-6-6-2 Class MH, the largest Mallet in service. SAR management were reluctant to accept the initial test results which showed the Garratt to be more economical, to have better haulage capacity, and to be capable of working at faster speeds. Two more tests series were necessary before Class GA was recognised as being superior and no more Mallets were acquired.

gases were conveyed lengthened their time in contact with heat-absorbing surfaces. In short, boiler performance was excellent.

of 1 in 30 and 275’/ 300’ radius curves. Using sand, the locomotive re-started the train on a 1 in 30 reverse curve without slipping – to the astonishment of observers.

The Garratt was subjected to a load test (368-ton train) on 22 June 1921 on a 4.5 mile section with a ruling gradient

In August 1921, Williams conducted comparative tests between Class GA No. 1649, an MH Mallet and a 14th Class

Garratts versus the rest 4-8-2. On the 29th of that month, he submitted a summary report to “Mr Gemmell” [a senior officer, actual position unrecorded]. This is the verbatim text, taken from a fragile carbon copy of this report: (page 100).

for the abnormal wear on the flanges…’. The curve was then traversed at walking pace: ‘…the check rail was observed to be displaced as the engine proceeded, as the leading Bissel and leading coupled wheels of the trailing engine [power bogie] were too tangential to the curve, to avoid this’.

That this document failed to achieve acceptance is apparent from a report dated 19 October 1921 by C Lawson, Superintendent (Mechanical), Johannesburg. Together with Hendrie, he supervised tests of the Garratt on the LadysmithMooi River and Durban-Cato Ridge routes, the purpose of which was ‘to ascertain the suitability of the Garratt type of engine for negotiating the curves, and the tractive effort of

The report continued ‘So far as the two types of articulation are concerned, there is no doubt that the Mallet engine is far superior and the absence of tyre wear, especially flange wear, has always been a strong feature in favour of the Mallets. The Garratt is more similar to the Kitson Meyer engine, which was worked experimentally for about two

A short, fat boiler is always more efficient than its long, thin counterpart. One reason is the greater water volume adjacent to the firebox; another is reduced heat loss because the firebox front is closer to the superheater header. This drawing depicts the boiler used in the Class MH Mallet compared with that of Class GA. [The drawings are to the same scale].

the Garratt compared with the MH [Mallet] type’. Lawson submitted an interim report to the General Manager which noted that earlier results had neglected ‘important details of the wheel arrangement, and also the effect of the Garratt type of articulation on the position of the wheels on the road’. It was noted that previous assumptions of similarity with a bogie coach or wagon were not relevant as: ‘The position of the bogies of the Garratt, the position of their centres and the fact that the tractive effort of the leading engine [power bogie] is transmitted through the frame which is the position of a chord to the curve, induces factors not present in a bogie vehicle and which have great influence in the position of the wheels on the rails.’

months, and required the flanges to be turned up prior to being sent [back] to the late Central South African Railway’. The reference to the Kitson-Meyer, an acknowledged failure that would have been fresh in the corporate memory, reveals a superficial comparison and suggests undue bias. Lawson’s concluding paragraph, presumably written with Hendrie’s approval: ‘Whether the adhesive force on the larger Garratt can be to greater advantage than on the consolidated engine [presumably 4-8-2 14th Class] is, from my observation doubtful. I think with the same ratio of adhesion and tractive force, the Garratt, Mallet and consolidated [i.e. 14th Class] are much the same’. Three days later Hendrie reported more fully and in similar vein although he acknowledged that flange wear was insignificant with 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class GB whose maximum axle loading at 7.5 tons was more than 10 tons less than

The engine was stopped on a 300’ radius curve: ‘…and the wheels were carefully examined. The leading Bissell wheel was lying at a noticeable tangent to the rail, which accounts 99

Beyer-Garratt that of its larger brother. In essence, earlier in the year Hendrie had told Wakefield that he was not an advocate of articulated engines (whether he was drawing a distinction between the semi-articulated Mallet and the articulated Garratt and Meyer derivatives is unclear). His comments at this stage indicated entrenched preference for the Mallet, supported by some rather ambiguous comments about its superior performance at speed.

wear were firmly refuted. These comments are important in contributing to general recognition (beyond South Africa) of the desirability of inboard carrying axles.

While the performance of Class GA provided mounting evidence of the superiority of the Garratt boiler, the question of flange wear was a major stumbling block. Class GB No. 1650 entered service in May 1921 and from the start performed impressively. To learn more about chassis behaviour, Wakefield had a cradle fashioned and slung below the boiler to enable his observation of how the inboard trailer trucks behaved while the locomotive was on the move. He concluded that nothing significant was amiss and that the trailer trucks were essential to the engine’s riding characteristics, and in minimisation of wear. Perhaps because he was an employee of the manufacturer, his evidence was discounted while there was evidently no SAR employee sufficiently brave (or foolhardy?) enough to check the veracity of his observations by adopting the same method.

Speed: The Garratt has a lower total weight than a Mallet of equal power and can thus haul a greater load at higher speeds.

Wakefield reported to Gorton on 12 June 1921 inter alia ‘There is a very big field for Garratt locomotives in South Africa and it is only a matter of time, the South African Railways financial position Is a bad one. Sir William Hoy [General Manager of SAR] gave me the assurance before I left South Africa for India that he intends having more Garratts’. Subordinates apparently failed to endorse that optimism judging from further enquiries instigated by the General Manager.

Test loads: The Garratt had less weight per 1000 lbs of tractive force than either a conventional locomotive or the Mallet. Comparative tests (14th Class versus Garratt) between Bellair and Bothas Hill:

On 30 November 1921, Hoy sought the views of the Assistant General Manager, Durban on the Lawson/ Hendrie reports. The Acting Superintendent (Mechanical) [a Mr Watson? – possibly AGW who succeeded Collins as CME in 1929] replied to the AGM Durban, who presumably transmitted the message to Hoy. The flange wear issue was quickly cleared up by noting that the situation with the Garratt Class GA was the same as that affecting two single [i.e. rigid-framed] engines. It was pointed out that the flanges of leading bogie wheels on passenger engines working from Durban required turning every six weeks. The longer life of flanges on Class GB was directly attributable to lower allup weight while the differing distances between engine units (as implied by Hendrie) had no appreciable impact. Significantly, it was identified that guiding wheels [i.e. trailer trucks] ahead of the rear set of coupled wheels would reduce flange wear. Also, containment of axle loading in relation to lightly-built track, would enable greater train weights than a Mallet could manage. Finally, claims by Lawson/ Hendrie that Williams had failed to report adequately on flange

Other aspects of this report summarised: Tractive force and weight: The Garratt has a lower tractive force and less adhesion, and is therefore less powerful but is capable of hauling matching loads satisfactorily.

Boiler: The Mallet is a design compromise to cope with space restrictions enforced by the boiler mounted over coupled wheels. The Garratt avoids these limitations and allows a simple deep firebox. Despite the shorter tubes, the flue area is about 30% greater and as combustion gases move more slowly, a lower smokebox vacuum is required. The firebox should give less stay trouble making it cheaper to maintain. Bissel trucks: Experience has proved that with careful design, they are remarkably free from derailment in being always parallel with the higher rail on curves, a feature not shared by a bogie.

Hendrie’s assertion that the second round of tests had supported his contention of the Mallet’s ‘vast superiority’ failed to accord with the empirical evidence. The debate apparently became contentious in presenting what appear to have been facile arguments in defence of the Mallet. Opposing views highlighted the need for further objective analysis. More tests were held over a longer period in early 1922, observed by Williams. The Garratt made 58 round-trips of 88 miles between Ladysmith and Glencoe Junction between February and April in direct competition with a Class MH. The Garratt’s average load was 830 tons [Mallet – 820 tons] with an average coal consumption of 125 lb per mile [Mallet – 143 lb per mile]. In hill climbing, the Garratt’s performance was consistently superior and over the three worst inclines, the aggregate times for the Garratt were 4,130 minutes [Mallet 5,358 minutes]. The Garratt rode freely up to 40 mph while the Mallet was rough, uncomfortable and possibly unsafe above 25 mph. It was estimated that on average the Garratt completed the round trip in around 43 minutes less.

100

Garratts versus the rest Mallet proponents argued that the Garratt type was a complex form of tank locomotive whose adhesive capacity diminished with fuel and water consumption. It was undeniable that weight reduced as fuel and water was expended but this ignored the advantage gained through elimination of the tender’s deadweight. This saving improved the relationship between total and adhesive weight, regardless of fuel and water levels. Percentagewise, Garratt No. 1649 was significantly smaller in several respects:

of the self-driven bogies…thus tending to keep the bogies steady as against the disturbing forces of the steam acting on the pistons which in previous double-bogie engines has caused the bogies to have a wriggling movement, especially at high speeds). In ultimate recognition, SAR ceased acquisition of any further Mallets and eventually became host to the world’s largest Garratt fleet. Hendrie retired as scheduled on 25 April 1922 and a little later it was officially announced that all new locomotive acquisitions would be articulated with rigid-framed engines only obtained for special needs. As reviewed in the next chapter, reality turned out rather differently but the immediate impact was profound. By overcoming entrenched opposition towards the new type, Cyril Williams had honed his analytical and persuasive skills that would be put to good use in the vital role he would soon assume with BP. The exercise must have been frustrating but the objective was achieved in gaining the endorsement of a major operator, to BP’s longer term advantage. In his annual reports for the years 1921/ 2/ 3, Sir William Hoy (of SAR) spoke warmly of the improvements stemming from investment in Garratts. Finally, Hendrie was a senior engineer of immense stature who had successfully pioneered South Africa’s large engine policy. With scheduled retirement approaching, his adherence to belief in the Mallet’s superiority in face of mounting evidence to the contrary was inconsistent with his experience and achievements, This commitment to the Mallet cause defies explanation; on retirement, he stayed in South Africa and took up cattle farming near Pietermaritzburg.

Overall length Total weight Adhesive weight Boiler heating surfaces Grate area

18% less 25% “ 2% “ 21% “ 2% “

In careful testing over a longer distance, the Garratt consumed 18% less coal and 16% less water than the Mallet hauling the same load. The Garratt was superior in uphill haulage ability, rode better at higher speeds downhill and on the level, and covered an undulating distance in 118 minutes compared with the Mallet’s best of 137.5 minutes. Over lengthy single line stretches, shorter elapsed timings naturally improved the track occupancy factor. (The potential for higher safe operating speeds had been predicted by Herbert Garratt in his preliminary patent application: The coal and water are principally carried on and so form part

Modified Fairlie and Union-Garratt With Hendrie’s retirement and the pronouncement favouring articulated (not specifically Garratt) locomotives, the prospective loss of custom must have alarmed North British Locomotive Co. which since 1900 had supplied 49 Mallets plus numerous rigid-framed locomotives. Further, the experiences with Double Fairlies and the solitary Kitson-Meyer completely discounted multiplication of either type. BP threatened assumption of a monopoly, at least while protected by the patent so the response by the UK’s largest commercial manufacturer suggests rapid retaliatory thinking. Hugh Reid, Deputy Chairman of North British had long been interested in turbines whose success in steamships had encouraged his exploration of their possible use in locomotives. This first took shape in 1910 with the experimental 4-4-0+4-4-0 Reid-Ramsay Steam-Turbine Electric Locomotive which was a double power bogie machine with a single girder frame that supported a coal-

101

Beyer-Garratt

North British Locomotive Co works No. 23141, known as the Reid-MacLeod Steam Turbine Locomotive was a rigidframed 4-4-0+0-4-4 experimental machine. Although not definitely confirmed, it seems likely that this machine with an overall wheelbase of 54’ 6” and rigid frame length of 64’ provided the platform on which the Modified Fairlie concept could be satisfactorily mounted.

fired boiler that powered a turbine electric generator plus a large steam condenser. The ensemble was effectively a miniature electric power station on wheels and the energy generated fed four electric motors hung one each on the four driving axles. The concept was advanced for its time and after a few short rest runs that exposed several practical difficulties, the experiment was abandoned and the locomotive set aside.

Nevertheless, Reid’s fascination with steam turbines remained and in 1924 the frame structure, boiler, turbine wheels and bogies of the Reid-Ramsay machine re-emerged as NBL works No 23141, known as the Reid-MacLeod Steam Turbine Locomotive. This was a simpler machine where mechanical transmission replaced the axle-hung electric motors and one of the bogies was reversed to create a 4-4-0+0-4-4 wheel arrangement. The original frame structure and length was retained but removal of

This Modified Fairlie drawing and plan shows the key design drawbacks in the long rigid frame, and the resultant overhang at either end.

102

Garratts versus the rest

SAR 2-6-2+2-6-2 Modified Fairlie Class FD No 2323 (NBL works No. 23297). The Railway Gazette

the electric generator enabled placement of turbine, boiler and cab closer to the locomotive’s centre. The condenser remained and still occupied a lot of space but it was clear that simplification of the power train yielded room for a large steam locomotive whose rigid frame could be carried by power bogies employing conventional reciprocating transmission. Although not specifically confirmed, it seems probable that the frame structure of No 23141 (64’ long) provided the template for a new articulated locomotive type for SAR. This had two power bogies with driving and carrying wheels that supported a single rigid frame of similar profile but about three feet shorter. The superstructure resembled a Garratt for which it could be easily mistaken. The continuous platform between front tank/ smokebox and cab rear/ bunker was the main distinguishing feature. It seems probable that this engine (works No 23140) was built concurrently with the rebuilding programme to create the Reid-MacLeod Steam Turbine Locomotive. Thus creation of a viable alternative to the Garratt might offer a means of retaining South African market share. By now the effectiveness of BP’s product was gaining broad acknowledgement so NBL’s initiative seems to have been an opportunistic exploitation of the turbine engine’s structural features to produce a credible alternative to the Garratt. This strategy circumvented BP’s patent but presented a small problem in what to call the new type. Technically it was a

Meyer variant but resuscitation of that title risked reminder of Cape Government Railways’ experiences of 1908-12, and might possibly have fallen foul of Kitson’s proprietorial interests. Accordingly NBL reached further back in history and christened its new creation the ‘Modified Fairlie’. The configuration below footplate level resembled a Double Fairlie but the superstructure was quite different. Whether the choice came from NBL or the customer is unknown but bets were hedged by producing a locomotive, classified FC, that dimensionally closely followed Class GC, the second Cape gauge branch line Garratt. The need for articulated power on secondary lines had first been acknowledged with the simple expansion Mallet of CSAR (later SAR Class ME) and clearly a modestly-sized engine was the safest means of introducing the new type. Neither Class ME nor Class FC were multiplied beyond their prototypes but a larger Modified Fairlie appeared as 2-62+2-6-2 Class FD in 1926, of which four were built. These engines followed four 2-6-2 +2-6-2 Garratt Class GD that had been delivered the previous year; BP supplied another GD in 1926. The FC/ GC dimensional similarity was repeated with FD/ GD: A drawback that derived from the genesis of the Modified Fairlie had probably yet to emerge. Reid-MacLeod Steam Turbine Locomotive No. 23141 had been unveiled at the 1924 British Empire Exhibition although it was then

103

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of 2-8-2+2-8-2 SAR Class HF introduced 1927, built by Henschel. This was the largest example of the ‘pure’ Modified Fairlie (as opposed to the Union-Garratt).

internally incomplete. Limited test running was undertaken between Glasgow and Edinburgh in 1926-7 before turbine failure terminated the experiment, although the locomotive proved very smooth-running as was typical of steam turbine machines. However, testing over that main line inevitably failed to expose the frame and bogie structure to the lateral and longitudinal stresses typically found in South Africa. On the Modified Fairlie, the bogie pivots were almost at the centre of the coupled wheelbases with the power bogies mounted as far apart as possible to maximise space for the Garratt-style boiler and firebox. It was argued that this layout would reduce flange wear with less variation in load distribution. In service, the two Modified Fairlie classes proved reasonably satisfactory but the long rigid frame yielded substantial overhang on sharp curves which induced up-and-down oscillation and resultant metal fatigue. Also, the additional load on pivot bearings led to rapid wear, attributed to the weight of tanks and bunker being borne by the rigid frame rather than directly by the

power bogies. Heavier maintenance expenses resulted in comparison with their Garratt equivalents. Numbers built and length of operating careers:

Although NBL’s interest ended with Class FD, both the Garratt and Modified Fairlie concepts made an impact among those German manufacturers with aspirations in southern Africa. On expiry of the Garratt patent in 1928 there was an effort, probably at the behest of Afrikaans elements on the SAR

Drawing of SAR Union-Garratt 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class U. The CME’s relaxed attitude towards design policy was exposed with the longer, thinner boiler apparently chosen by the builder. This form discarded some of the advantages bestowed by the Garratt boiler philosophy.

104

Garratts versus the rest Board, to place business with non-British manufacturers. It was normal practice for a full set of drawings to be provided to customers concurrent with delivery of a prototype locomotive and apparently copies of both BP and NBL origin were passed on to German competitors to help them in the tender process. Although a breach of trust, there was little that the British parties could do by way of redress. Certainly Colonel Collins who succeeded Hendrie had a laissez faire attitude towards competing suppliers’ proposals and the resultant multiplicity of types delivered in 1927-9 seriously undermined the principles of standardisation. In view of the expiry of the German-registered patent on 26 July 1926, it seems probable that four manufacturers moved promptly in anticipation and according to Cyril Williams, acted in collusion with SAR. This was the most concerted attempt to dislodge BP from its premier position in the Garratt market. The company had mounted sales promotions as in South America, and being busily focussed elsewhere, the German competition was pushing against an open door.

compared with the Garratt might still have awaited clear proof as Collins persisted in showing little concern for standardisation. Ten more of Class GE (with certain improvements) were built by BP and ten Modified Fairlies of Class HF (apparently meaning ‘Heavy Fairlie’) were designed and built by Henschel. Substantially larger than classes FC/ FD, the HF shared cylinder and wheel dimensions with Class GE but had bar frames. The HF had enough novel features to wonder why the established practice of building a prototype for testing was ignored and rather oddly, a further example was added in 1928. In service the HF repeated the operating shortcomings of Classes FC/ FD leading to heavy repair costs. Withdrawals took place in 1950/1 while Garratt Class GE continued in service until 1975.

While peripheral to the Beyer-Garratt story, certain features were material to evolution of the Gorton product. For example, 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class GF, for many years numericallyspeaking the largest Garratt class anywhere introduced modern bar frames. However, these engines were not as good as they could have been as at Collins’s insistence, they retained old-type cylinders with Z ports and short-lap valves, features contrary to contemporary German practice (and to BP’s design policies). They also suffered with overheating of the inside bearings on the rear trailer truck which soon led to their replacement with outside bearings. The class then became a useful general utility type although the early problems reflected the absence of Gorton Foundry’s accumulated know-how.

front end layout with a Modified Fairlie type rear end where the boiler/ cab section’s frame was extended back to carry the bunker. Designated “Union-Garratt”, this hybrid form anticipated still larger boilers and hence greater bunkers with the related need for mechanical stokers. The idea was jointly patented by BP and Maffei but only applied in full by the latter. BP used a variant in the New Zealand Garratts (Chapter 9) and on the proposed Garratt-Mallet (Chapter 14) which never proceeded beyond the drawing board.

Classes GCA and GDA were introduced as developments of BP’s classes GC and GD. The GDA type quickly proved unsatisfactory and was set aside soon after delivery pending modifications. This became publicly controversial and was a contributory factor in Collins’s departure. Otherwise, the two types do not call for comment here, other than to note that the GDA re-emphasised the wisdom of working in cooperation with BP. The remaining German-sourced classes are more relevant to the Garratt evolution. Recognising the need for more 2-8-2+2-8-2 locomotives, twenty were sanctioned and delivered in 1927. The inferiority of the Modified Fairlie

Classes U and GH of 1927 continued the policy of scant regard for standardisation (and also disruption of logical type identification). Most significantly they introduced a variation on the Garratt theme by combining the traditional

Class GH was a double pacific, modern in its bar frames and superheater but old-fashioned with z-ported cylinders and short-travel valves. The section behind the cab provided for a 13-ton capacity bunker but no tank; the remaining water supply was carried in a tank slung beneath the boiler forward of the ashpan. These large engines with 5’ driving wheels were designed for passenger service and the large fuel capacity anticipated use on long-distance services. The cantilevered bunker arrangement was installed to facilitate a Duplex mechanical stoker which was later found unnecessary as the connection between the centre and rear sections of a conventional Garratt was inherently more stable than that between a rigid-framed locomotive and its tender. Class U (nicknamed ‘U-boat’) was a 2-6-2+2-6-2 Union Garratt intended for freight work. Both types rode reasonably well at the front end but at the rear suffered the

105

Beyer-Garratt

SAR Union-Garratt 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class U No. 1370 built by Maffei, Germany in 1927.

oscillation that plagued all three Modified Fairlie classes. While the GH’s boiler largely followed normal Garratt proportions, that on Class U was longer and thinner, thus further eroding commitment to standardisation. Both were under-cylindered in relation to boiler capacity and neither showed substantive advance over BP’s format. Both classes were out of service by 1957 whereas their BP-built equivalents worked for another 15-20 years.

Articulated locomotive policy in the period 1925-9 was marred by the profusion of types of varying competence which induced Collins’s successor to limit new investment to rigid-framed locomotives. AG Watson pursued boiler standardisation with existing classes and explored the potential for rotary cam valve gear. To improve steaming rates, he investigated the Wootten boiler whose parabolic curves accommodated a broad firebox at the base.

A side effect of the German locomotives was stylistic. Until arrival of these locomotives, Garratts from Gorton had looked functional at best, most prominently in the rectangular front and rear tanks. The German locomotives introduced tanks with curved tops to the sides and also an elliptical end profile to the upper tank surface. Cabs in some cases had subtly curved side sheets. SAR Class GE, so much the yardstick for comparison with other eight-coupled Garratts in the 1920s, reflected these trends. Order No. 02405 of 1924 followed the BP straight-cornered utilitarian styling; order No. 1116 [1926] had curved top corners to the tanks; order No. 1169 [1930] saw improved cab side windows and inward tapering to upper part of the side sheet, in the style of Class GF.

Watson’s first design was 4-6-2 Class DA built by Henschel with a Wootten firebox which demonstrated phenomenal steaming capacity compared with earlier rigid-framed engines. Installation of wide fireboxes followed with later mainline types, specifically 4-8-2 classes 15E/ 15F, 2-10-4 Class 21, and 4-8-4 Class 25. Grate sizes were commensurate with those of eight-coupled Garratts but the shorter, fatter boiler barrel could not be fitted for obvious reasons. Comparison of the relationship between heating surfaces and aggregate cylinder volume of rigid-framed engines and their nominal Garratt counterparts reflect the degree to which the barrel of the latter contributed to thermal efficiency: (below). Uganda Railway later Kenya Uganda Railway Increasing loads passing over the Uganda Railway from

106

Garratts versus the rest

In the early 1920s, increased traffic levels to the Kenya Highlands saw introduction of KUR 4-8-0 Class EB3 (later EAR Class 24) built by Vulcan Foundry. This long-lived and versatile type handled a wide range of duties over lightly laid routes on account of its 10-ton maximum axle loading. The chassis configuration and driving wheel diameter (3’ 7”) were adopted for the first KUR 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts. Despite the significant increase in overall weight and length, it was possible to contain the maximum axle loading at 10 tons for Class EC and 10.55 tons for Class EC1.

Mombasa on the Indian Ocean to Kisumu on Lake Victoria was a pressing problem by 1910. A new generation arrived in 1913/ 4 in the form of North British-built 0-6-6-0 Class MT Compound Mallets of which there were eventually 18 in service. The first two weighed over 60 tons each (locomotive only), and were the largest engines in the UR fleet. They were equipped with 15.5” x 20” HP and 24.5” x 20” LP cylinders with slide valves throughout. Lack of familiarity with articulated power might have been a contributory factor but the first two soon earned a poor reputation. Maintenance proved heavy and they frequently suffered leaks in the low pressure steam pipes. Sixteen more followed with piston valves on the HP cylinders, and with other modifications. Riding remained poor due to the reciprocating forces generated by the large LP cylinders and the absence of a pony truck. Further, maximum speed was constrained by the 3’ 3” driving wheels which made schedules hard to maintain. Soon after the war, those based at Mombasa were equipped to work as oil-burners but as maintenance problems persisted, they became seriously rundown. The last two in service (Kenya Uganda Railway Nos 105-6) were withdrawn from Nairobi depot in 1930. The first four Garratts were supplied to KUR in 1926 (4-82+2-8-4 Class EC Nos 41-4) and quickly proved superior. KUR and its successor, East African Railways, became a committed Garratt customer (as documented in Chapters 10 and 12) and never acquired another Mallet.

Two years later, Garratt supremacy faced another threat in the form of 2-8-2 Class EA Nos. 1-6 built by Robert Stephenson. These were impressive machines, built as oil burners with 4’ 3” driving wheels, large high-pitched boilers and large bogie tenders. At almost 91 tons (engine only) with a maximum axle loading of 17.5 tons, they were the heaviest non-articulated metre gauge locomotives in the British Empire. Initially confined to the KUR mainline from Mombasa to Makindu (rather more than halfway to Nairobi), completion of relaying with 80 lb/ yard rail in 1932 saw their operation as far as Nairobi. They completed ten 660-mile round trips per month and by 1950 all had run more than one million miles. To conform with the rest of the EAR fleet, they became coalburners in 1929 with manually-operated rocking grates. In this form they steamed extremely well and were remarkably light on fuel. Reliability was initially impressive as each locomotive had two dedicated drivers who worked each round trip, operating in shifts and travelling in a caboose when off duty. Crews were specially trained, particularly in maintenance of the axlebox cooling system which drew water from the tender. When driving duties were pooled, reliability deteriorated and the incidence of hot axleboxes increased which problem remained unsolved until Timken roller bearings were fitted. Other modifications were effected including introduction of power reverse and rebuilt tenders when KUR (by then East African Railways) reverted to oil burning.

107

Beyer-Garratt A problem that defied several attempted solutions was rough riding which could become violent, despite fully compensated springing. Later in their careers they were confined solely to freight duties but faster schedules, which they had difficulty in maintaining, resulted in broken rods and frame bars. The sum of these experiences demonstrated the limitations that could afflict large narrow gauge rigidframed engines. Poor riding, axle loading restrictions, and structural fractures were avoided with the larger KUR/ EAR Garratts. Nitrate Railways (Chile) In 1926, three Garratts were delivered to this railway to improve the operation of nitrate traffic which had hitherto been largely handled by powerful 4-8-4Ts built by Yorkshire

Pakistan, a mountainous region with gradients as steep as 1 in 25. Normal motive power was 2-8-0 Class HGS; double-heading was common and heavier trains required up to four locomotives. About 1923, a Baldwin-built 2-6-62 compound Mallet was acquired in the hope that doubleheading could be eliminated and in 1925 a 2-6-2+2-6-2 Garratt was purchased with similar intent. BP rated the Garratt as capable of hauling 350 tons compared with the maximum of 160 tons for a single 2-80. Its leading dimensions were specified by the operator in order to conform broadly with the Mallet and thus subject to criteria similar to those in South Africa’s GA/ MH contest. The Garratt (works No. 6203 Class GAS No. 480) was built to contemporary Indian standards with plate frames, modern straight-ported cylinders, drive to the third axle, superheated boiler and Belpaire firebox. Comparative dimensions: (bottom left). The Garratt was a straightforward, competent design but performance was inferior in wet conditions when compared with a pair of eight-coupled Class HGS locomotives which displayed superior adhesive properties. A more objective test would have used an eight-coupled Garratt but before this could be pursued, the NWR purchased 30 second-hand Class N 4-cylinder 2-10-0s from the Great Indian Peninsular Railway following their redundancy through electrification. The NWR’s Garratt and Mallet were transferred to less arduous routes and being non-standard, both had relatively short careers. The Garratt was withdrawn in 1937.

Engine Co. Comparison of key dimensions in the Table above shows the BP product’s greater haulage capacity. Cyril Williams who visited the railway in 1926 calculated that the three Garratts did the work of 6 to 7 tank locomotives and reduced the number of footplatemen required from 12-14 to six. North Western Railway (India) While tests in South Africa had vindicated the Garratt concept, more limited comparisons undertaken by the 5’ 6” gauge North Western Railway rendered less favourable results. This was India’s largest railway with over 6,600 routes miles that stretched into what is now northern

Right. Kenya Uganda Railway 2-8-2 Class EA built in 1928 by Robert Stephenson & Co was at 91 tons (engine only) the largest narrow gauge rigid frame type in the British Empire. KUR No. 4 Kilifi (works No. 3924, later EAR No. 2804) was intended to provide a Garratt-type boiler capacity with a grate area only about three square feet less than the Garratt classes EC/ EC1. This impressivelooking design was quite effective when assigned to dedicated, specially trained crews but became problematic once locomotives and crews were ‘pooled’. They then suffered distinctly non-Garratt problems:- hot axleboxes, rough riding, and broken frame bars and rods. All large KUR/ EAR engines thereafter were Garratts.

108

Garratts versus the rest

109

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 6 : South African saga

South African Railways Class GA No. 1649 displayed the austere appearance typical of early Garratts. This was the only Cape Gauge Garratt without inside trailer trucks as practice with contemporary Class GB proved the superior riding qualities of the 2-6-2 bogie. (A second official view of this significant yet camera-shy engine).

he first five Garratts supplied to SAR each made a significant impact. As discussed in Chapter 5, Class GA proved superior in boiler capacity, haulage ability and higher safe operating speeds while also revealing shortcomings regarding flange wear. Class GB validated that the flange problem was easily solved through provision of inner carrying axles while demonstrating consistently comfortable riding at higher speeds and enviable surefootedness, as reported by Williams (see Appendix E). The three 2’ 0” gauge Garratts of which little had been expected proved a revelation for the narrow gauge network and although early experience exposed frame weaknesses, their enthusiastic reception by workshop and footplate personnel affirmed the attractions of the concept. These factors established credibility for a variety of duties which was duly noted by management, and which also alerted competitors to the Garratt’s potency. The challenging period of validation bore fruit in November 1923 with the following orders for 20 locomotives:

Gauge 3’ 6” The classes introduced up to 1925 showed intent to cater for a broad motive power spectrum and during the inter-war period, 73 Garratts were supplied by BP:

had investigated how pioneer Class GA No 1649 was faring in ordinary service. In his report to BP dated 5 December 1922, he advised that it was stationed in the Ladysmith district and had notched up a mileage in excess of 35,000. The main problem had been that the lugs on the cylinder covers on which the slide bars were mounted had broken as being too light for the arduous work which the locomotive habitually undertook. Repairs had been effected but he felt that a stronger motion plate was needed which he would discuss further when he arrived at Gorton Foundry. He also mentioned that the rate of flange wear had reduced, without offering explanation. This report typified the valuable feedback which he would relay to Gorton during his career, based on his extensive operational experience Most of No. 1649’s career was spent in Natal, in its latter years hauling passenger trains between Ladysmith and Harrismith which included a 1 in 30 climb through Van Reenen’s Pass. With regard to the following classes, these are assessed by type: Class GE These engines pioneered the eight-coupled power bogie in Africa. Works numbers for the first six showed that they closely followed Burma Railways 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class GA No. 21 (works No. 6180).

With less than a month of his employment with SAR remaining, Cyril Williams 110

South African saga

South African Railways network map.

The first batch was immediately successful leading to an order for ten more which were delivered in 1926, and finally another two in 1930. (The design also formed the basis for types delivered to other operators). They were mainly used on the Johannesburg-Zeerust route, a distance of 149 miles with a ruling gradient of 1 in 40, and curves as sharp as 477 feet radius. One incline is approximately 20 miles long with the ruling gradient practically continuous over that distance which called for full regulator and 60% cut-off for about 70 minutes with freight loads up to 500 tons. As a test of boiler

capacity (and the fireman’s stamina), this work graphically demonstrated the haulage ability that a well-designed Garratt could deliver. Further, despite the 3’ 9¾” driving wheel diameter, Class GE was an accomplished passenger locomotive that worked the ‘Rhodesian Mail’ between Johannesburg and Zeerust at speeds reaching 45 mph. These remarkable 2-8-2+2-8-2s also hauled passenger trains over the North Coast line plus the ‘Zululand Mail’. Later, they worked between Pretoria and

Diagram for Class GA.

111

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of Class GA.

First series 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class GE.

Second series Class GE.

Pietersburg, and also handled freight traffic over the Natal north coast line. In addition they briefly operated across the Montagu Pass between George and Oudtshoorn, and their final deployment was on the Nkwalini branch in Natal before replacement by classes GEA and GO. No. 2262 was the last steam locomotive to be fully overhauled in Durban workshops; the last ten in service were all withdrawn in 1975. Class GG The third ‘large engine’ version of the early SAR Garratts

after the GA and GE types was 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class GG No. 2290. This solitary example derived directly from Class GA but differed in its wheel arrangement and in having 4’ 9” driving wheels. Specifically intended for express passenger and mail trains, it was initially allocated to Touws River, and found capable of speeds as high as 57 mph according to its Flaman Speed recorder. Further, it proved capable of hauling 1,245 tons up a 1 in 80 gradient, and also demonstrated its capacity by taking a 340-ton passenger train up the 15 miles of 1 in 40 of the Hex River Pass in 62 minutes without banking assistance. Uniquely for SAR, the bunker was

112

South African saga

Diagram for second series Class GE.

Third series Class GE.

equipped with a coal pusher. Unfortunately, its Achilles heel was unsteadiness when running at higher speeds which was attributed to the absence of a leading bogie. It was accordingly relegated to ordinary passenger services and freight duties. In all-round performance, No 2290 proved inferior to 4-8-2 Class 15CA that was introduced soon afterwards. The two types were used over the same route and the comparison did no favours for BP’s cause.

Classes GA/ GE/ GG shared the same boiler and when the two singletons were withdrawn in 1938 (the GA had cracked frames), their boilers were retained for use with the eightcoupled class. Class GB W Wakefield, having supervised assembly of the prototype of this class, reported to Gorton on a round trip from

Drawing of Class GG

113

Beyer-Garratt

The solitary member of Class GG, No. 2290 was specifically built for faster passenger duties and while a feisty performer it is understood to have suffered from stability problems.

No. 1650, prototype for Class GB.

Durban to Illovo River on 10 June 1921. Departure on the return leg was delayed 15 minutes by another service but despite nine station stops during the 22-mile journey, arrival at Durban was a half-minute behind schedule. This sparkling performance came to typify Class GB’s capabilities. Cyril Williams had been happy enough with the performance of Class GA No. 1649 but was positively effusive over Class GB No. 1650. For many years it worked passenger services on the South Coast line out of Durban, a route that included

1 in 30 gradients. It demonstrated a remarkable turn of speed while retaining a stability that justified its continued allocation to the fastest trains. JM More, Assistant General Manager, at the 1923 Estimates Meeting in Johannesburg pressed the General Manager for twenty more; Williams was hopeful that at least five would be approved. Verbatim copies of Williams’s reports on No. 1650 dated 2 September & 4 December 1922 to the Superintendent (Mechanical) appear in Appendix E.

Diagram for the production series Class GB.

114

South African saga

Production series of GB, distinguished from the class prototype by the improved cab.

For many years this class was associated with the Aliwal North-Barkly East branch which featured compensated 1 in 30 gradients. These engines were well regarded and longlived, with the last withdrawn in 1968. Class GC Following the good impression imparted by Class GB, the first design ordered by Colonel FR Collins after his appointment as CME was this enlargement, also intended for branch services. Collins drew up the specification with design and construction carried out at Gorton Foundry and final assembly undertaken at Durban workshops in 1924/ 5. They were superheated with Belpaire fireboxes, plate frames, Walschaerts Valve gear and piston valves. Although heavier than Class GB, with its 10.5 ton maximum axle loading it was still suitable for light rail. The design was largely derived from New Cape Central Railway Class G (later SAR Class GK). Class GC was another favourite for passenger commuter services on the South Coast line. The 10.5-ton axle loading allowed postponement of significant expenditure in strengthened bridges and up-graded track (then laid with 45/ 50 lb per yard rail). These benefits were repeated elsewhere as secondary and branch line Garratts with their sure-footedness and ‘go anywhere’ capability greatly helped efficiency in less heavily trafficked areas where steep gradients and sharp curves abounded. They were initially concentrated on the south coast route and while they worked on other branch lines, they were always allocated to Natal from where they were withdrawn in 1962.

Class GD The GB/ GC formula was developed further with this class which had considerable operational flexibility over routes using 60 lb per yard, aided by a slight increase in driving wheel diameter and axle loading increased to 12.7 tons. In terms of design specification, they continued the general pattern of classes GB/ GC. Their first duties were on the Cape Town-Caledon branch which included Sir Lawry’s bank, 10 miles at 1 in 40 with numerous 330’ radius reverse curves and they were the first Garratts used on this line. They also worked the North coast line and the Pietermaritzburg-Franklin route in Natal. These useful, trouble-free engines were later deployed on the Midland Cape system across the Montagu Pass between George and Oudtshoorn. Their final transfer was to the Port Alfred branch where they remained until withdrawal in 1967 after over 40 years of good service, Referring back to the Mallet fleet, the only example for branch service was the solitary Class ME built for Central South African Railways in 1912. The type was not multiplied, apparently because the long boiler was unsuited to the constantly undulating profile of secondary routes. This family of smaller Garratts ideally filled a significant gap in the motive power spectrum. Class GK Two Garratts had been supplied to the independent New Cape Central Railway in 1923 as Class G Nos. 12 & 13. They were the last engines supplied to this well-run company

Class GC No. 2182 as built.

115

Beyer-Garratt

Diagram for Class GC.

Class GD continued the evolution pattern set out with GB/ GC.

Diagram for Class GD.

before its absorption into SAR in May 1925 and they duly became SAR Class GK. They had been obtained specifically to work over the 147-mile Worcester-Riversdale route where they were rated to handle 280 tons, a loading that had previously required a pair of 4-8-0s. The nominal tractive effort was similar to that of Glass GD but their boilers were smaller which resulted in their having slightly inferior haulage capacity. Being less useful to SAR, they were

transferred to Natal where they worked on branches until withdrawal in 1937. Articulated locomotives built by other manufacturers in the period 1924-9 are summarised in Table right. Generally speaking, these classes were not as sound as they might have been had they embodied the lessons that BP had learned. It was inevitable that SAR was denied the benefits

116

South African saga of standardisation with so many different manufacturers and types involved. The muddled motive power policy in the later 1920s and profusion of different types militated against the cause of articulated power. Collins was succeeded by AG Watson who, unenthusiastic about the concept generally, pursued an intensive programme of modernisation and boiler standardisation directed at larger rigid-framed locomotives as described in Chapter 5.

Right-hand side of Class GD.

117

Beyer-Garratt

New Cape Central Railway Class G No. G1 was absorbed into the SAR fleet in 1925 to become Class GK No. 2340.

Class GK No. 2341, as later fitted with enlarged bunker.

Careers comparison: BP types against other manufacturers’ products

Diagram for SAR Class GK.

118

South African saga

One of the first two members of Class GL as built. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Class GL No 2351 Princess Alice, although some SAR locomotives received unofficial names, formal christening as in this case was unusual. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Class GL However, there was one further Garratt class of the 1920s that went a long way to redress shortcomings in other quarters. By 1928, loadings on the 73-mile DurbanPietermaritzburg route had grown to an extent that made double-headed 14th Class 4-8-2s almost obligatory. It was decided that a Garratt type with power output equivalent to a pair of the 4-8-2’s (aggregate tractive effort – 74,720 lb @ 75%) was needed for the climb from Durban which included almost 38 miles at 1 in 66. The challenge was handed to BP in tacit recognition that Gorton Foundry was best placed to produce something really special, following upon the extended negotiations conducted by Cyril Williams as described in Chapter 3. These engines were needed as a stopgap measure to relieve a traffic bottleneck before electrification of this busy route could be completed and the result was 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GL, a pivotal design in the Garratt story. The line for which the class had been primarily intended had been completed in 1921 as a considerable improvement

over the original alignment. The design nevertheless had to be capable of operating if required over the old route which included extended stretches at 1 in 30 and curves as tight as 300-ft radius. In everyday service, the 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class GE was probably the most significant BP design of the early years, weighing 148.4 tons in its first manifestation while the first examples of Class GL were almost 50% heavier at 211.05 tons. As is apparent from the table below, eight-coupled Garratts that exceeded 150 tons had progressively increased in size and numbers during the 1920s and Class GL was the first to exceed 200 tons. Bengal Nagpur Railway 4-8-0+0-8-4 Class N would soon wrest that title, weighing in at 234 tons but Class GL remained the more remarkable simply because the Indian example ran on a gauge that was two feet wider. Col. Collins prepared the specification and assembly took place at SAR’s Durban workshops but design and manufacture was entirely Gorton’s responsibility. Great care was devoted to the design using the latest techniques and exploiting features refined by BP during twenty years’

119

Beyer-Garratt

Class GL fitted with steam operated chimney cowl. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Diagram for Class GL.

experience in Garratt construction. They were fitted with bar frames and straight-ported valves, the first in South Africa of the long-lap variety. The round-topped boiler was equipped with thermic siphons and the firebox was mechanically stoked. Stability was important in a locomotive whose maximum boiler diameter was more than twice the rail gauge. A special form of spherical pivot on the leading bogie allowed the locomotive to negotiate minimum 275 ft radius curves and also 300 ft radius reverse curves with 4½” super-elevation and no intermediate tangent. As the largest steam engines in the Southern Hemisphere,

they were received with caution and subjected to extensive testing before entering regular service. A particular problem was the level of smoke and gas emission while traversing the many tunnels between Durban and Cato Ridge. A steam turbine-driven ‘Sturtevant’ blower was installed to clear the footplate of noxious fumes; this equipment was later replaced through an alternative remedy which was a steamcontrolled cowl over the chimney. In service they performed superbly and more than satisfied the demand for additional power over the route for which they were been required. On test between Durban and Cato Ridge, a single Class GL with half throttle and maximum 45% cut-off hauled 1117 tons in 163 minutes compared with the

120

South African saga best effort with a single 4-8-2 Class 14 which was 500 tons in 184 minutes. The following day, a load of 1205 tons was managed. Thereafter, loads were limited to 950-1000 tons which just happened to equate the maximum rating for triple-headed electric locomotives beyond Pietermaritzburg. Comparison of a Class GL against a pair of Class 14 graphically demonstrated the superiority bestowed by the size and shape of the boiler: (right). Haulage capacity aside, the Garratts rode well and were remarkably smooth in negotiating curves. Seven weeks of thorough testing confirmed their abilities and six more were ordered that were similar to the first pair except for having chimney cowls from the start. The eight GLs worked on the climb from Durban until 1938 when they were replaced by electric power. They were then transferred to Vryheid to handle coal traffic where they coped competently with 1200 tons on gradients as steep as 1 in 50 until electrification of that route in 1968. They were then transferred to freight services between Stanger and Empangeni where loads were less demanding. As they could not be fully extended, they were replaced with more modern but less powerful 4-82+2-8-4 Class GMA/ Ms. Until arrival of the East African Railways ‘59s’, SAR Class GL was the largest narrow gauge steam locomotive type in Africa. This highlighted their only really significant shortcoming which was route availability limited by size and weight. After over 40 years of hard work, redundancy resulted from lack of routes over which their formidable capacity could be exploited. Two of the class have been preserved. AG Watson retired in March 1936 and was succeeded by WAJ Day who was more receptive towards articulated steam power although only one Cape Gauge type was introduced during his tenure. His 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GM was another important type in forming the template for the fleet of large Garratts introduced after World War 2, as described in Chapter 12 ‘Indian Summer’. Watson’s antipathy towards articulation meant that by the late 1930s, SAR was increasingly challenged on the Johannesburg-Zeerust section of the mainline to Mafeking and Rhodesia. These conditions had been confronted and overcome by 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class GE in the 1920s, and now it

was the turn of Class GM. Heavier trains up until introduction of the new class were entrusted to Garratts of classes GE and GF, Class 19D 4-8-2s and Watson’s solitary 2-10-4 Class 21. In a situation that reminded of the climb from Durban, none of these types working singly was adequate and the best solution thus far had been double-headed Class 19Ds.

Class GM Class GL, proven master of heavy haulage in challenging conditions, was the obvious base from which to develop a new type. In view of weight limitations, it was first proposed that a GL with a smaller boiler might be suitable in a locomotive that developed power equivalent to a pair of Class 19Ds. Drawings were prepared that failed to pass muster with the civil engineer on the grounds that weight was still excessive. This prohibition was overcome by a combination of measures in addition to the smaller boiler. The bunker capacity was reduced from 12 to 10 tons and the rear water tank was removed. The forward tank whose capacity on the GL had been 4650 gallons was reduced to 1600 gallons, sufficient only for shunting and short distance work. The shortfall was covered by provision of an auxiliary

Drawing of Class GL

121

Beyer-Garratt

Diagram for Class GM.

Individual axle loadings

This side view of Class GM illustrates one measure adopted to reduce weight and axle loading as compared with the Class GL. The leading power bogie carried a water tank of 1600-gallon capacity while the rear power unit carried only the coal bunker. Provision of an auxiliary water supply in the form of an adapted bogie tank wagon might seem a makeshift measure but the arrangement proved successful.

122

South African saga

Class GM three-quarter front view.

Class GM with auxiliary tender coupled to the leading power bogie. Another tender stands to the rear of the locomotive.

supply carried in a bogie tank wagon. Apparently, it was normal practice with the GM (and with post war Class GMA/M & GO family) to use water only from this auxiliary tender and to leave the tank on the leading power bogie full to preserve adhesion. This arrangement had been employed occasionally elsewhere (including Cape Government Railway 0-6-6-0 Kitson-Meyer No 800 as mentioned in Chapter 5) but SAR was the only operator to apply it on a wholesale basis. Neither was it unprecedented for BP as the principle had been used with the six 0-6-2+0-6-2 Meyers (works Nos. 5617-22) built for the Antofagasta (Chili) & Bolivia Railway in 1913. They were later provided with water-only bogie tank tenders basically similar to the South African variety. The measures applied to the new Class GM achieved a 17% reduction in overall weight and 20% in axle loading, changes which satisfied the civil engineer. The individual axle loadings of classes GL and GM appear opposite. Class GM was a significant design that circumvented the route availability restrictions that had constrained preceding

Class GL. Its greatly broadened sphere of operations opened the way for the successful GMA/M and GO families after World War 2. With class withdrawal which was completed in July 1973, No. 2292 was placed in store and earmarked for preservation which regrettably never eventuated. However, despite being officially extinct, Class GM in the form of Nos. 2301/ 3/ 4 was hastily resurrected and refurbished following a motive power crisis in the Eastern Transvaal. Required to fill in for absent Class GMA/Ms, they were allocated to Breyten depot from where they worked main line duties to Piet Retief, before relegation to pick-up freight work and colliery shunting. Thus they continued to work for SAR for about a year but were never formally recorded as being in service during this period so presumably traffic records reflected train movements by non-existent motive power. Class NG-G11 (saturated) The first Garratts purchased by SAR were three 2’ 0” gauge 2-6-0+0-6-2s (Class NG-G11 Nos. NG 51-3) delivered in 1919. Equipped with Belpaire boilers, they were otherwise conservative with saturated boilers and slide valves as apparently little was expected of them. Like all narrow gauge Garratts in South Africa, they had outside frames.

123

Beyer-Garratt

When finally taken out of unofficial SAR service, the trio was purchased by Dunn’s Locomotive Works who hired them out for colliery service until final withdrawal in 1977/ 8. This view shows ex-SAR No. 2301 leaving the SAR yard at Vandyksdrift with a rake of empty 40-ton capacity bogie wagons bound for Douglas Colliery. The rake seems to comprise about 35 wagons which implies an aggregate full train weight of around 2000 tons on departure from the colliery, which load required the assistance of a 4-8-2 locomotive. Some industrial lines in South Africa were quite long and in this case, the GM’s 1600-gallon water tank was inadequate so the locomotive is coupled to a tender that had been recovered from retired Mallet class MC1 No. 1643. AE Durrant

124

South African saga

Gauge 2’ 0” Their introduction was contentious as their first test was to negotiate a reversing triangle on the basis that if successful, there would be nothing to fear on the main line. On one curve the front power bogie derailed and SAR officers immediately concluded that the engine was unsuited for normal work. W Wakefield (who was there from BP to supervise assembly) in conjunction with a SAR maintenance engineer measured the curvature and found the radius to be well under the 2.5 chains stipulated in the product specification. As soon as main line trials commenced, one SAR officer raised a succession of fatuous criticisms concerning slipping, haulage capacity etc which by reasoned argument Wakefield was able convincingly to refute. However this officer

persisted in baseless and trivial objections until Hendrie (CME) adjudicated in the matter. It seems likely that this individual also sought adversely to influence footplate crews which required Wakefield to intercede and eventually there was widespread acceptance of the narrow gauge Garratts. The saga was a foretaste of the deliberate obfuscation that was to be encountered with the Cape Gauge pioneers. In summary, performance exceeded pre-delivery hopes and revolutionised attitudes towards narrow gauge motive power possibilities. Cyril Williams reported to BP on the trio in early December 1922, commencing with No. NG 51 which had run 41,000 miles before its first workshop visit, a record for an SAR

South African Railways 2’ 0” gauge Class NG-G11 No. 51 in saturated form as built in 1919.

Class NG-G11 No 54 as preserved at De Aar locomotive depot. John Tolson

125

Beyer-Garratt 2’ 0” gauge locomotive. The others returned from the workshops in October 1922 and both within a week broke their frames. It had been found earlier that the frames were being damaged by excessive wear on the friction pads so part of the frame had been cut away to improve clearances, and this had led to cracking. The Mechanical Engineer, Durban considered the frames to be too weak and Williams apparently tacitly agreed. His own words in a report to BP: “Of course I am not telling the SAR this”. (He was due to leave SAR service and start work with BP at the end of that month.)

Williams added recommendations to BP about the need for stronger frames including those for Garratts planned for New Cape Central Railway (eventually SAR Class GK). His rationale was that poorly ballasted track induced greater stresses than Gorton had taken into account. Interestingly, he concluded that SAR workshop personnel ‘feel that the breakage does not point to any defect in the Garratt engine, and know that it is a matter which can be easily got over. At the same time it is annoying especially at a time when everyone is pushing the engine.’ This episode shows that Williams was already working hard but discreetly in BP’s

Class NG-G11 No. 55 was one of the two superheated examples introduced in 1925. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Class NG-G12 No. 57, one of two locomotives whose construction was sub-let to Franco-Belge in 1927. This was the smallest and lightest of SAR narrow gauge Garratt classes, and judging by the styling, Franco-Belge played an active role in the design. The appearance was certainly more modern than that of contemporary BP Garratts but evidently had no impact on Gorton’s policies. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Diagram for Class NG-G12.

126

South African saga

A batch of eight Class NG-G16 was supplied in 1937; these four images show this popular design from different angles. Beyer Peacock

cause by providing yet more valuable feedback to Gorton on quality issues. Nos. NG 51/ 53 worked for SAR into the 1960s while NG 52 was sold into industrial service and was at work at least until 1970. Class NG-G11 (superheated) By 1925, revised attitudes towards narrow gauge Garratts saw two more of the type (Nos. NG 54/ 5) introduced with the key differences of superheating and piston valves. All five initially worked timber, sugar cane and general freight on the Umzinto-Donnybrook line which had gradients as steep as 1 in 33 and curves as sharp as 150 feet radius. Following arrival of larger narrow gauge Garratts they were moved to the Estcourt-Weenen branch; Nos. NG 54/ 5 ended their careers in 1967 shunting at Port Elizabeth.

Class NG-G12 Two more engines were supplied in 1927 as 2-6-2+2-62 Class NG-G12 Nos. NG 56/ 7. One was allocated to the Upington-Kakamas branch in South West Africa and the other to the Fort Beaufort-Seymour line. Both routes were laid with 20 lb/ yd rail and these engines revolutionised operations through their vastly superior performance compared with the 4-4-0s used previously. These were the smallest Garratts owned by SAR and were assigned works numbers 6365/ 6 in the BP list. However, as Gorton was fully engaged with other orders, they were built under licence by Franco-Belge and on entering traffic carried the latter’s works Nos. 2506/ 7.

127

Beyer-Garratt which greatly aided access to the motion. The mounting of the front tank and rear tank/ bunker on pedestals helped access between the frames and probably made the fireman’s work easier. This was the first Garratt design to use a curved profile to the front tank in preference to the rectangular Gorton product. The cab was more sophisticated than that used with Class NGG11 and the overall impression was of a thoroughly modern, almost prescient, machine but the end result apparently made no impact on Gorton’s styling policies.

Locomotives built under aegis of BP

From 1940, both were at work on the Kakamas branch and when that line was converted to Cape Gauge in 1949, they returned briefly to South Africa before withdrawal in 1952/ 3 and sale to Rustenberg Platinum Mines as Nos. 5/ 6. They were scrapped in 1959. Class NG-G16 Soon after introduction of Class NG-G12, there was a quantum increase in size with the supply of Class NGG-13 Nos. 49/ 50/ 58-69/ 77-83 in 1927/ 8, designed and built by Hanomag. This move paralleled SAR’s Cape gauge strategy to prefer German builders at the expense of BP. However, the association with BP was restored in 1937 with Class NG-G16 which was similar to the Hanomag engines in dimensions and body styling. Both types were designed to work over the more significant narrow gauge routes which were laid with 35 lb/ yd rail. Proportionate to their gauge, they were large engines with total weight in the region of 61 tons, compared with the 7075 ton range of 3’ 0” gauge 2-6-2+2-6-2 Classes GB/ GC.

With weights substantially lower than the preceding BP-built 2’ 0” gauge engines, a fresh design approach was evidently adopted by FB. Axle loading limitations probably dictated adoption of inboard carrying axles but the opportunity seems to have been taken for a fresh design approach. The cylinders were set at a slight angle with drive to the third axle as in Class NG-G11 but the side running plate over cylinders and driving wheels on both power bogies was discarded 128

South African saga Twelve examples of Class NG-G16 were delivered by BP in 1937, four of which were built under licence by Cockerill. Like the Hanomag engines of ten years earlier, they were equipped with superheater, piston valves, round-topped boilers but were more modern with roller bearings on the carrying axles. Further batches appeared in 1951 and 1959; the latter batch was ordered for Tsumeb Corporation in South-West Africa (Namibia) but as that system was in course of conversion to 3’ 6” gauge, they were re-directed to SAR. The class played a significant role in propagation of the 2’ 0” system as SAR sought eight more from BP in 1967. Unfortunately, the Gorton complex no longer had

limestone traffic to the Eastern Province Cement Works. With replacement by diesel power, they undertook a wide range of duties in Natal and in some areas were the sole source of motive power. These routes abounded in steep gradients and sharp curves with trains loaded up to 400 tons over easier sections. Classes NG-G 13/ 16 are well represented in preservation. The Tsumeb locomotives differed from the remainder of Class NG-G16 in weights and fuel /water capacities. in anticipation of arid conditions in South-West Africa, they were equipped to operate with auxiliary water tenders in

Diagram for Class NG-G16.

BP Works No. 7867 was built for Tsumeb Corporation, South-West Africa (Namibia) which operated the 2’ 0” gauge route line from Usakos (on the Cape Gauge Windhoek-Walvis route) northward to Tsumeb. Built as No. TC11 in 1959, by then that system was in course of conversion to 3’ 6” gauge. The seven locomotives under this order were thus transferred to SAR, this example becoming No. NG-G142 on that company’s roster.

the production capacity so the order was passed to Hunslet Engine Company. Construction was undertaken by their South African associates, Hunslet Taylor & Co (Pty) Ltd and delivery was completed in 1968. These were the last Garratts built for general service anywhere. Classes NG-G 13 & 16 were used on a wide range of routes, initially mainly over the 177 miles from Avontuur to Port Elizabeth hauling seasonal agricultural produce and also

the manner of the Cape Gauge GM/ GMAM classes but never worked in this mode. The differing dimensions: Alfred County Railway The ACR route was one of four 2’ 0” gauge lines in Natal. It was opened in 1917 by the Natal Government Railway over a distance of 76 miles between Port Shepstone and Harding in KwaZulu Natal, mainly for movement of agricultural produce to market. As the crow flies these two centres

129

Beyer-Garratt are substantially closer but the terrain meant that the line followed a tortuous course with bends as sharp as 150-feet radius and 20 miles of incline at 1 in 37 to reach the high veld. In the 1970s the line was dieselised but underinvestment and declining traffic led to its closure in 1986.

With re-establishment of South African access to world markets, there was a need for a refurbished transport link to move sugar cane, bananas, timber and other produce

to the coast. Accordingly the railway was privatised under the control of the newly formed Port Shepstone and Alfred Country Railway. Infrastructure, locomotives and rolling stock were leased from SAR and the route re-opened to freight in April 1988 with tourist operations following later. The new railway was profitable by year 3 but traffic levels started to decline following de-regulation of road transport in the 1990s. The lease arrangements were terminated in mid-2004 and following unsuccessful attempts to run limited tourist services, all operations ceased in 2006. The railway suffered storm damage in 2008 which destroyed coastal bridges and the system was abandoned. Twenty-five locomotives were included in the lease transaction of which only one, a Class NG-G16 Garratt was in operating condition. As part of the re-opening exercise, two Garratts were extensively rebuilt and modernised using the LD Porta’s Gas Producer Combustion System (GPCS), and were formally re-classified NG-G16A. This system was most prominently associated with SAR 3’ 6” gauge Class 26 No 3450 “Red Devil”. The ACR engines had GPCS, Lempor exhaust, improved spark arrestor, lightweight multi-ring articulated piston valves, improved valve events and superior mechanical lubrication. They proved competent and achieved a 25% saving in fuel consumption compared with a conventional Class NG-G16. BP-built No. NG141 (works No. 7866) was one of the pair used in this programme: Details of the second locomotive were similar except regarding weights and coal capacity which suggests that improvements had been effected based on experience with the first: Plans were prepared for a Garratt that would exploit the GPCS principles further, to be classified NG-G17 but these never came to fruition. Some collieries and industrial complexes in South Africa maintained 2’ 0” and 3’ 6” gauge railway networks, together with their own motive power fleets. In later years it became common for second-hand Garratts to be purchased from South African and Rhodesian railways for use on these systems. However, BP only built three Garratts specifically for industrial operators. (introduced 1990 etc) in RH column

130

South African saga

South African Industrial [Gauge 3’6”] Vryheid Railway Coal and Iron Co, later known as Hlobane Colliery The first was supplied to this colliery in 1925 to haul 500-ton loads of coal from the pithead to connect with South African Railways at Hatting Spruit. The 8-mile journey involved two banks at 1 in 50, and sharp curves. The system later changed its name to Vrieheid Railway Coal & Iron Co. This Garratt spent its entire career on this service and was scrapped about 1970 following the line’s closure. It was numbered 3 but late in its career it became Hlobane Colliery No. 2. It was identical with New Cape Central Railway Nos G1/ 2 (later SAR).

Dundee Coal & Coke Ltd and Consolidated Main Reef Gold Mining Co Ltd These South African industrial operators were not formally connected but they each ordered a 2-6-2+2-6-2 Garratt to the same design. The Dundee Coal system, laid with 60 lb rail, was 11 miles long with a ruling gradient of 1 in 79 ruling gradient and curves as sharp as 300 feet radius. The Garratt’s work was to move the colliery’s daily 5000ton output to Waschbank station on the Natal main line of SAR. With a rated load of 1250 tons, roughly double the maximum permitted for other locomotives, the number of daily return journeys was halved. On closure of this colliery, it was sold to Transvaal Navigation Collieries.

Alfred County Railway Class NG-G16 as extensively rebuilt and modernised with the LD Porta’s Gas Producer Combustion System. This is believed to be No. NG-G141.

South African Industrial Cape Gauge Garratt: Dundee Coal Co Ltd 2-6-2+2-6-2 No. 5.

131

Beyer-Garratt The locomotive supplied to Consolidated Main Reef Mines and Estates Ltd at Langlaagte is believed to have proved too powerful as it was soon sold to New Ralegh Colliery. When that mine closed, it was acquired by New Clydesdale colliery at Bezuidenhoutsrust. It was later sold to Transvaal Navigation Collieries so after following completely separate careers their last years were spent working at the same location. Both were scrapped about 1978. This design was used for a pair of locomotives supplied to Compania Minera de Sierra Menera, Spain. This was a 125-mile long private railway to transport iron ore from Ojos Negros mines near Teruel to Altos Hornos steelworks at Sagunto. The Spanish locomotives (running Nos. 501/ 2) were virtually identical to the South African pair except for modification to metre gauge; they were built in 1930 by Euskalduna (works Nos. 189/ 90) under licence from BP. Post-war The Cape Gauge construction programme which recommenced with deliveries in 1945 covered 4-8-2+2-8-4 classes GEA, GMA/M and GO. They are described in Chapter 13 in the context of the final phase of the Beyer Garratt story.

132

Vryheid Railway Coal & Iron/Hlobane Colliery locomotive

South African saga Dundee Coal & Coke and Consolidated Main Reef Gold locomotives

South African Industrial Cape Gauge Garratt: Consolidated Main Reef Gold Mining Co Ltd No. 1 later No. 5

133

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 7 : Inter-war four-coupled production

The UK’s first Garratt was works No. 6172 0-4-0+0-4-0 No. 10 supplied in 1924 to Vivian & Sons Ltd. There were minor differences with the three that followed but the quartet were known as the ‘Vivian Garratts’.

lmost one-third of Garratt orders received before World War 1 had been for four-coupled locomotives. Thereafter, the four-coupled chassis formed a minor element of production, essentially for specialised needs:

Vivian Garratts Industrial railway systems in the UK were generally short and most motive power requirements were satisfied by small conventional tank locomotives. Manning Wardle & Co and

This undated drawing of the industrial 0-4-0+0-4-0 shows the alternative water levels in the firebox when descending or ascending a 1 in 20 gradient which illustrates one of the inherent advantages of the short fat Garratt boiler. Acute gradient changes in hilly terrain overseas as in parts of South Africa prevented use of Mallets with their longer, thinner boilers.

134

Inter-war four-coupled production

§ Vivian engine (works No. 6172 only; others 1380 gallons. Peckett & Sons were examples of builders that developed much of their businesses around such custom. However, industrial railways were often built to standards below those of mainline systems with uneven trackwork, sharp curves and steep gradients. These conditions could severely tax the traditional 0-4-0ST so often favoured by industrial operators as at the facilities of Vivian & Sons Ltd of Swansea. The site was relatively cramped and on varying levels, necessitating a ruling gradient of 1 in 20 and several 150 ft radius curves plus one as tight as 97 ft. The standard load was 150 tons and the system presented a microcosm of the circumstances under which larger Garratts operated overseas. The first bespoke industrial Garratt was 0-4-0+0-4-0 works No. 6172 supplied in 1924 to Vivian (later acquired by British

Copper Manufacturers Ltd). The design proved entirely satisfactory and was the subject of an advertising campaign with the message ‘Halve your shunting costs’. Three more with minor differences were supplied in 1931/ 4/ 7 to two collieries and a manufacturer, and as a group they were referred to as the ‘Vivian Garratts’. Their respective identities are recorded in the Table above. They could be considered the most successful of the three Garratt types in ordinary service in the UK. Withdrawn in 1965, William Francis survives in preservation as Britain’s last operating Garratt, prior to the endeavours of the narrow gauge preservation movement.

The Vivian Garratts were enormous compared with more normal types of British industrial locomotives which were predominantly four- and six-coupled side and saddle tanks, but modestly sized compared with most mainline articulated engines built at Gorton. William Francis was supplied to Baddesley Colliery, Warwickshire in 1937 as the last of the four UK industrial Garratts. It worked from Atherstone on the ex-LNWR Nuneaton-Lichfield route to the colliery, a line whose average gradient was 1 in 47 but which included a stretch at 1 in 23. Beyer Peacock produced only six maximum adhesion Garratts and this was the last example.Transport Treasury.

135

Beyer-Garratt

The second attempt at a double-Atlantic was a batch of five built for the standard gauge Entre Rios Railway, Argentina in 1926. Like the Tasmanian engines, the result was a handsome design but in this case without the multi-cylinder complexity that shortened the working lives of the Tasmanian pair.

Entre Rios and Argentine North Eastern railways [Gauge 4’ 8.5”] Entre Rios (in English “between rivers”) Province is in the north-east of Argentina, bordering the provinces of Mesopotamia, Buenos Aires, Corrinetes and Santa Fe, and also the country of Uruguay. Most of the Argentinian network is 5’ 6” gauge but the systems of the Entre Rios and Argentine North Eastern railways were originally Britishowned, built to standard gauge and isolated from the national network by river crossings. From 1915 onwards, the two operations which connected at Concordia were managed by the same administration. Both companies were nationalised in 1948. A total of eight 4-4-2+2-4-4 Garratts were supplied to the two companies, five for Entre Rios and three for Argentine North Eastern as follow:

serviceable, in the railway workshops at Asuncion in 1977. In 1925-7, twelve 2-6-0+0-6-2 Locomotives were supplied for freight work. The superstructure of the latter was similar to that of the double Atlantics. (see Chapter 8).

These locomotives were fitted with plate frames with Z-ported and piston valves. However, at least one example was fitted with Lentz rotary cam poppet valve gear, as reported in BP Quarterly Review for October 1927 but the identity of the locomotive(s) so treated and for how long the equipment was in place appears to be unrecorded. Standard reference sources make no reference to the matter (see Chapter 2). They were effective machines, quite long-lived and favourites for loan to the standard gauge railway system of Paraguay which never owned Garratts in its own right. That country’s system was generally poorly maintained and one of the double Atlantics was noted, apparently no longer

Ceylon Government Railways [Gauge 2’ 6”] The main railway system of Ceylon was built to 5 ft 6 in gauge but there were also 2 ft 6 in lines in rural districts.

136

Inter-war four-coupled production

The left hand side of the Entre Rios double-Atlantic. This photograph appeared in the BP Quarterly Review for October 1927 (Page 40) and the accompanying commentary refers to ‘One of the most recent applications of Lentz valves has been made to some Garratt type locomotives for passenger service on the Entre Rios Railway’. There is no record of how many were so treated, their identities or for how long the equipment was in place. None of the standard reference sources comment on this equipment. It is apparently the standard BP arrangement of Lentz rotary cam poppet valves actuated by Walschaerts motion, presumably with separate steam chests to facilitate possible reversion to piston valves. It is surmised that the absence of further information is due to the Lentz equipment’s early replacement but this should not be regarded as definite. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

The Entre Rios locomotives were sufficiently well regarded for the associated Argentine North Eastern Railway to acquire three examples with minor differences in 1929. It is understood that the eight were rotated between the two systems. Science Museum

Diagram of Entre Rios Railway 4-4-2+2-4-4.

137

Beyer-Garratt

Photographs of the double-Atlantics of either system at work are elusive but here is one of the Entre Rios engines. They were favourites for loan to the Paraguay Railway whose own fleet largely comprised the products of the Yorkshire Engine Co.

A single narrow gauge locomotive was ordered by Ceylon Government Railways in 1929 and delivered in 1931. Sources differ on its deployment but initially it seems to have been used on mixed traffic duties on the Uda Pussellawa railway whose line connected Nanuoya (on the CGR main line, 129 miles from Colombo) through mountainous country to Ragala, a distance of 19 miles. The Garratt was out of service 1942-4 following a serious accident while working a freight service at excessive speed. Completed in 1903, this railway was eventually closed in 1948 due to dwindling usage.

The Garratt then worked on the line from Colombo eastward to Opanayake over a distance of about 50 miles. Known as the Kelani Valley line, this route which had been built to service rubber plantations included gradients as steep as 1 in 24. It was originally worked by a pair of 0-4-2Ts but given the length of the railway, services must have been meagre. The Garratt apparently arrived in the late 1940s and worked intermittently until the 1960s. Withdrawn in 1972, it was scrapped in 1981.

Diagram of CGR 2-4-0+0-4-2

138

Inter-war four-coupled production

Although appearing minuscule, Ceylon Government Railways’ solitary 2-4-0+0-4-2 with a total weight of 39 tons was heavier than the small Garratt types built by BP before World War 1. The year 1929 was a busy period for BP and it must be questionable whether construction of a one-off narrow gauge locomotive for an obscure operator was worthwhile use of the company’s resources.

Leopoldina Railway, Brazil [Metre gauge] The background to this railway, a longestablished BP customer, is described in Chapter 11. Four 2-4-2+2-4-2s were ordered in 1939 to double haulage capacity over the Cantagallo branch from Portello to Cordiero, a 77-kilometre route that presented particular operating challenges. The track was lightlylaid and supported by poor ballast with gradients as steep as 1 in 30 and curves as sharp as 30-chain radius. Only four-coupled locomotives were permitted and all traffic had hitherto been handled by 0-4-2Ts. These conditions combined with heavier traffic dictated the urgent need for purposedesigned Garratts.

Ceylon Government Railway

Leopoldina Railway

Pre-World War 2 manufacture had tended towards production for specific circumstances. By 1939, an order for four specialised Garratts was at odds with the prevailing need for mass produced standard types for use by multiple operators (see Chapter 14 ‘War machines’). With the possible exception of the fifteen 4-8-2+2-8-4s supplied to Sierra Leone Government Railway in 1955, the Leopoldina 2-4-2+2-4-2s were the last manifestation of this bespoke tradition. With Gorton burdened by War Department orders for a large volume of railway and non-railway items, manufacture of these locomotives was given low priority. Their completion during 1942 presented more problems as with so much activity, storage facilities were limited but so also was shipping space. Eventually a suitable vessel was located and they arrived safely in 1943. As the last four-coupled Garratts built at Gorton and the only example of that wheel arrangement by any manufacturer,

they were an interesting blend of old and new. In size, body style and with plate frames they resembled smaller designs of the 1920s. Contrary to contemporary practice, they carried Belpaire fireboxes with a grate that was large compared with the rail gauge. This was necessary to cope

139

These official photographs (see opposite upper) demonstrated the flexibility that was possible with a metre gauge four-coupled Garratt. Beyer Peacock

Beyer-Garratt

140

Inter-war four-coupled production

with low grade coal with up to 40% ash content although later they consumed timber with equal proficiency before becoming oil-burners. They had rocking grates, selfcleaning ashpans, and Walschaerts valve gear that actuated oscillating Lentz poppet valves. In later years, they strayed (like the Leopoldina‘s larger Garratts) from the lines for which they were originally intended.

Fortunately they were sufficiently unusual among other work for the prototype to receive particular attention from the official photographer. Post-war order No. 11143 was intended to cover another four but was then cancelled. Of those that were built, Nos. 400/ 3 were withdrawn in 1967 and the other two the following year. Regrettably, all were scrapped.

The four Leopoldina Railway 2-4-2+2-4-2s were the last four-coupled Garratts built by BP and the only example of this wheel arrangement anywhere. They were workmanlike-looking machines that proved effective burning low grade coal, then timber and finally oil. Beyer Peacock

141

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 8 : Inter-war six-coupled production

Trans Zambesia Railway Nos. 5 & 6 of 1924 were the first 3’ 6” gauge deliveries to the continent after those sent to South Africa. This is No. 6 which shows the austere rectangular tank style typical of the early Garratts. Science Museum

espite the chapter title, within the respective railway/ type commentaries are included details and illustrations of locomotives with six-coupled power bogies introduced during or after World War 2. The rationale

for this apparent inconsistency is that no completely fresh six-coupled designs were introduced after 1940. All later construction embraced repetition, improvement or modernisation of earlier classes. For example, Rhodesian

Railways 15th/ 15A classes were part of a continuum that commenced with a fresh design for the Sudan introduced in 1936. Also, RR’s last ‘new’ six-coupled type (Class 14A of 1953) embodied several modern features but was essentially an up-grade of pre-war classes. The Ceylon Government locomotives closely followed the pre-war prototype, albeit with an important development in reversing gear. Classes thus included ‘out of sequence’ are summarised in Table left. Individual operators are listed in this chapter chronologically by the date on which they first acquired six-coupled Garratts. Where an operator owned more than one type, all are reviewed in the respective operator section, again in the chronological order of their acquisition. For ease of reference, the first entry for each individual operator appears in the lower table opposite.

Trans Zambesia Railway No. 7 was delivered in 1927. It differed from the first two in having the later form of leading tank. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

142

Inter-war six-coupled production

143

Beyer-Garratt Trans-Zambesia Railway (Gauge 3’ 6”) This international railway diverged from the main line from Beira, Moçambique to Rhodesia at Dondo Junction (a few miles west of the port) and proceeded northward across the River Zambesi into Nyasaland (now Malawi). This small Garratt fleet was acquired and initially operated by the TZR which was later divided into two separate concerns – Nyasaland Railways and Moçambique Railways. However, the Garratts apparently remained under the combined ownership of the two concerns. They hauled trains weighing up to 750 tons between Beira and Murraca over a distance of 176 miles on a route with a ruling gradient of 1 in 80. The two supplied in 1924 and the third in 1927 were based on those delivered in 1923 to the New Cape Central Railway as Class G. The main difference was that the TZR locomotives were adapted to burn timber. A change in styling was evident in the front tanks, the first two having the square profile typical of the early Garratts whereas the third had the later style, curved inward at the top along the sides. They gave good service but all were withdrawn in 1947.

Indian State (North Western Railway) [Gauge 5’ 6”] As discussed in Chapter 4, the NWR purchased a solitary 2-62+2-6-2 Garratt classified GAS in 1924. It was described as a banking engine for use on the Mush Kaf to Bolan section and was the only Garratt bought by Indian State Railways. A 2-6-6-2 Mallet had been acquired in 1923 for similar duties and both suffered from slipping in wet conditions. They were tested individually against pairs of 2-8-0s (one as the train engine and one banking). The basis for the comparison seems biased at this distance and NWR unsurprisingly concluded that continuation of a pair of rigid framed 2-80s was preferable. As the tests were between 16 driving wheels on the consolidations and 12 on the articulated/ semi-articulated engines, the outcome was predictable calling into question the validity of the trial results.

After about eight years working as a banker, the Garratt (together with the Mallet) was transferred to the Rawalpindi division where there were long gradients at 1 in 100. The Railway Magazine for April 1939 reported that working as the train engine, it had successfully handled ‘double loads’. This was a competent design albeit heavier than it need have been because of the operator’s insistence on the 144

Inter-war six-coupled production

North Western Railway (India) No. 480 was acquired in 1924 for road trials against a six-coupled Mallet and a pair of conventional 2-8-0s. The Garratt was a perfectly satisfactory design but working uphill its adhesive qualities were unsurprisingly outclassed by the pair of consolidations. This was before the first 2-8-0+0-8-2 Garratt entered service in Burma. Such a wheel arrangement would have provided a fairer basis for comparison. The Railway Gazette

Views of NWR (India) No. 480 at work appear to be scarce; this view was published in The Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review for April 1931.

145

Beyer-Garratt

Argentine North Eastern Railway prototype 2-6-0+0-6-2 No. 101 introduced in 1925 as the first of seven locomotives. Beyer Peacock

inclusion of various ISR standard features – another example of conflict with BP’s best practices. Being non-standard, the Garratt was withdrawn in 1937. Argentine North Eastern and Entre Rios railways (Gauge 4’ 8.5”) (later part of Ferrocarril General Urquiza) In addition to the eight 4-4-2+2-4-4 Garratts supplied to these two companies (reviewed in Chapter 7), between 1925 and 1927 twelve 2-6-0+0-6-2s were delivered for freight duties as follows:

Victorian Government Railways, Australia (Gauge 2’ 6”) VGR operated several narrow gauge rural routes which featured heavy gradients and sharp curves, laid with 60 lb/ yd rail. These engines were introduced for heavy timber traffic previously handled by double-headed Baldwin Class NA 2-6-2Ts. The earlier engines were challenged by

The Argentine NE engines were renumbered and reclassified in 1948. Nos. 101-3 became Class B Nos. 416-8 while Nos. 104-7 became Class C Nos. 406-9. The Entre Rios engines were classified ‘R’. All locomotives shared the same leading dimensions except that the Entre Rios engines had greater fuel and water capacities, and hence weight differences, as noted below. They were designed to haul comparatively heavy loads over indifferently engineered trackwork so to that end, the maximum axle loading was modest while the long wheelbase was intended to spread the weight. Their tractive effort was 70% greater than the largest locomotives previously in service for a 21% increase in an aggregate weight and they yielded a 40% reduction in comparative running costs. Those delivered in 1925 had the plain rectangular leading and trailing tanks typical of the period but the two 1927 batches had the more refined styling with curved upper edges to the sides. The 2-6-0+0-6-2s of both railways were converted to burn oil in 1942. Little is recorded of their duties but they were mainly used on the line from Concordia to Monte Caseros (a distance of 96 miles) and were rated to haul loads of 800 tons up 1 in 74 gradients and 1000 tons up 1 in 100. 146

Entre Rios locomotives

Inter-war six-coupled production

Five engines similar to those with Argentine NE Railway were delivered to the associated Entre Rios Railway in 1927. The latter differed only in increased fuel and water capacities. Beyer Peacock

increasing loads and the Garratts achieved major reductions in fleet operating mileages. A Garratt could haul 255 tons compared with a maximum of 68 tons for a single 2-6-2T up 1 in 30 gradients, and overall fuel consumption was reduced by about 40%. No. G41 was used on the 70 km Colac to Crowes line and G42 on the separate, steeply graded 42 km route from Moe to Valhalla. Both were successful but traffic levels on other 2’ 6” gauge lines failed to justify further investment in the type. The Moe line closed in 1954 and No. G42 was transferred to the Colac route which closed in 1962. No. G41 was withdrawn in 1960 and broken up in 1964 while No. G42 was preserved by the Emerald Tourist Railway in the Dandenong Hills near Melbourne. Rhodesian Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] This system traditionally favoured British manufacturers for motive power. North British Locomotive Co (and its antecedents) was the major supplier of rigid-framed locomotives although some Canadian and US products were also used. Two Kitson-Meyer 0-6-0+0-6-0s of similar design to that used in South Africa were acquired in 1903 for heavy freight haulage. Although powerful, they could only work at speeds up to 8-10 mph and were heavy on fuel and water. Further, they were awkward to work as coal had to be physically manhandled from the separate tender every few miles, and their withdrawal in 1912 evoked little regret. EH Grey was appointed as Locomotive Superintendent in 1924 and having previously worked for South African

Railways, he was enthusiastic about the Garratt principle. He ordered 12 members of the 2-6-2+2-6-2 13th Class in 1925 and certain deficiencies in this design were rectified with the two batches of 14th Class delivered in 1928. These

The only Garratts owned by Victorian Government Railways were a pair acquired in 1926 to work timber traffic over 2’ 6” gauge rural lines. The appearance was typical of most early Garratts – distinctly functional. Beyer Peacock

147

Beyer-Garratt engines were deployed over a wide range of duties and were sufficiently useful for a modernised version in the form of Class 14A to enter service as late as 1953. The Garratt story is mainly one of success but 4-6-4+4-64 15th Class introduced in 1940 was pre-eminent in this respect. These locomotives set new standards in reliability and versatility, and five batches followed post-war including 20 of the up-rated Class 15A version. Double-Baltics ordered from BP eventually totalled 74 plus ten purchased secondhand from Sudan, classified 17th. As explored in Chapter 13, some survivors were still in ordinary service at the Millennium and worked on for about another 15 years. All RR’s Garratts were designed at Gorton and all were built there apart from the final batch of Class 15A which was sub-let to Franco-Belge. With the exception of 13th Class, the six-coupled designs proved sufficiently sound for repeat orders with evolutionary modifications. This consistency benefitted both manufacturer in achieving scale economies and operator in minimising the range of necessary spare parts. Individual orders: 13th Class Grey’s confidence was shown in the order for 12 locomotives (Nos. 160-171) dated 16 February 1925, soon after he took up his new post. Shipped in component form to Cape Town, they were assembled at SAR’s Salt River works, and delivered to RR between March and May 1926. Grey was keen to introduce a new locomotive generation as almost concurrently, he ordered from North British the first batch of 4-8-2 12th Class (Nos. 172-191). As an experiment, 13th Class Nos. 170/ 1 (and 12th Class Nos. 182-91) were fitted with Lentz oscillating cam poppet valves. The Walschaerts motion was specially designed to actuate either these poppet valves or the conventional valves fitted to the remaining ten, and the cylinders had flanged joints on the steam ports to accommodate whichever form of steam chest was eventually standardised for the whole class. In practice, the poppet valves rendered no significant advantage and the Lentz system was found hard to adjust in service. Walschaerts valve gear was soon substituted.

These engines proved the least satisfactory Garratts in service with RR. The design was derived from SAR Class GD but virtually every leading dimension was greater in the Rhodesian version. The class was first deployed on the 143-mile section between Umtali and Vila Machado which was difficult to work, even by Rhodesian standards (Umtali is 3360 feet above sea level). Originally laid to 2’ 0” gauge, following conversion Kitson-Meyers were first tried but the Garratts proved more successful. During the Meyer/ Garratt interregnum, 9th Class 4-8-0s were used which were subject to a 350-ton load limit but up to 455 tons was entrusted to the Garratts. Their monthly mileages frequently exceeded 4,000 which treatment exposed weaknesses in their plate frames, leading to several failures. This experience suggested that complete redesign might have been preferable to enlargement of the Class GD format. With the slump in traffic caused by the Depression, the whole class was placed in store in 1932 but there was progressive return to service later in the 1930s. Nos. 162/ 3 were sold into industrial service with Rhokana Corporation in Northern Rhodesia in October 1939 and employed on copper ore trains. The remainder were based in the Salisbury area and saw out their careers on secondary work before withdrawal in the late 1950s. 14th Class In 1929, the matter of constructional weakness was tackled with this class through use of bar frames which became a standard feature with all subsequent six-coupled Rhodesian Garratts. A round-topped firebox was substituted for the Belpaire used on the 13th Class and the boiler pitch was raised by 9” while heating surfaces remained virtually unchanged. There were minor changes in the positioning of headlamps and in the cab design. Coal capacity was increased to 7 tons while tanks were reduced to 3600 gallons. The first six (Nos. 215-20) replaced the 13th Class between Umtali and Vila Machado and monthly mileages often exceeded 6,000. Their effectiveness led to supply of Nos. 231-40 in 1930 and all sixteen then became the main

Diagram of Victorian Government Railways Class G.

148

Inter-war six-coupled production

The eight that remained with RR were renumbered 500-7 in 1949 and mainly allocated to branch line duties although Nos. 500/ 1/ 7 were used in the early 1970s between Umtali and Beira under an interim arrangement with CFM. Class 16A 2-8-2+2-8-2s were also used on this work. The three members of 14th Class returned to Rhodesia when Mozambique became independent in June 1975 (the Class 16A engines did not return until 1981).

source of motive power on services through to Beira. The transaction whereby that route was purchased in 1949 by CFM (Moçambique Railways) included RR Nos. 215-20/ 31/ 2 at a unit price of £13,000 (renumbered 901-8 in sequence by the new owners). They had been purchased new from BP at £10,634 each and although maintained to RR’s exacting standards, the capital gain on equipment over 20 years old might seem excessive. However, new locomotive prices had roughly doubled since 1939 and as these were still in service in 1975, CFM’s return on investment seemed reasonable.

14A Class FE Hough succeeded Sells as Chief Mechanical Engineer in 1947. Despite the effectiveness of the 15th Class still in course of delivery and the usefulness of the 4-6-4+4-6-4 17th Class purchased from Sudan, it was decided that there was a case for a more of the smaller six-coupled Garratts. The ancestry of Class 14A stemmed from the 13th Class of 1925 and as apparent in the dimensional table above showed minimal changes from the preceding 14th Class. This was a classic case of a design conceptually ideal for the operator’s requirements which evolved through BP’s accumulated experience. Part of the company’s culture had been high customer service standards and this was an example that proved the enduring strength of two-way loyalty.

149

Beyer-Garratt

Map of Rhodesian Railways network.

Advances evident with this class included self-adjusting this class being easier to operate with significantly lower truck pivots with side bearings (by now a standard feature of costs than with the earlier ‘small’ RR Garratts. modern Garratt design) which improved wear characteristics and greatly improved riding qualities. Historically, tank Eight of the class were originally based at Bulawayo with leakage could be a problem due to stresses induced by the remainder at Salisbury to work branch services radiating varying loads and frame flexing while on the move. This risk from the capital. On elimination of steam power from the was now reduced by use of special spring loaded securing Salisbury area, they were concentrated on Bulawayo and bolts; a relatively minor factor that reflected continuing Gwelo. By 1978, six were in store with the remainder still attention to small details in pursuit of better product quality. engaged on branch and shunting duties. Timken roller bearings were fitted to the carrying axles while coupled-wheel axleboxes were of the solid bronze type with 15th Class mechanical oil lubrication. Design progress was evident in In 1938, Major MP Sells took over as Chief Mechanical 150

Inter-war six-coupled production

The first Garratt type in service with Rhodesian Railways was 2-6-2+2-6-2 13th Class, a design achieved by enlargement of South African Railways Class GD. Their initial work was over the difficult 143-mile section between Umtali and Vila Machedo in Moçambique which revealed weaknesses in their plate frames. The least satisfactory of the RR Garratt classes, they were stored for several years during the Depression of the 1930s but were progressively returned to duty prior to World War 2. No. 166 shown here was officially photographed in as built condition. Science Museum

Diagram for Rhodesian Railways 13th Class.

Introduction of 14th Class led standardisation of bar frames on all subsequent six-coupled Garratts purchased by RR. These engines were a considerable improvement and with deployment on the Vila Machedo route, monthly mileages increased by about 50 % as compared with the preceding 13th Class. A small number were still in service in the mid1970s. Science Museum

151

Beyer-Garratt

Diagram for Rhodesian Railways 14th Class.

The final examples of the 2-6-2+2-6-2 wheel arrangement appeared in 1953 with Class 14A. There were few dimensional changes from 14th class introduced 1928 but they were modernised through technical developments by BP in the intervening years. Some examples stayed at work until the dying days of steam in Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia. Beyer Peacock

Rhodesian Railways Class 14A built for branch line work is seen here on shunting duties for which it was equally capable. No 520 is about to propel a sixteen coach passenger train into Bulawayo station in May 1966. This locomotive was refurbished and returned to traffic in January 1980 as part of the programme to give selected Garratts extended operating lives. R George Pattison

152

Inter-war six-coupled production

Drawing of Rhodesian Railways Class 14A No 512, built .

Engineer having previously held a similar post with Nigeria Railways. He moved swiftly to augment the Garratt fleet, initially investigating a possible further 2-6-2+2-6-2 class with increased power output but concluding that the necessary increase in axle loading would unduly limit route availability. He therefore adopted the 4-6-4+4-6-4 wheel arrangement for a new design that was about 50 tons heavier than the preceding 14th Class but with a marginal reduction in maximum axle loading. This wheel arrangement was used by only two operators, the first of which had been ten locomotives supplied to Sudan Government Railway in 1936/ 7, as described later in this chapter. (These engines became redundant with dieselisation after the war and were sold en bloc becoming RR’s 17th Class). The 4-6-4+4-6-4s ordered by Sells were developed from the Sudanese type with many dimensional similarities. Internal differences lay in the RR type having a boiler that was 6” greater in diameter and dimensionally similar to that carried by RR 2-8-2+2-8-2 16th Class. The cylinder diameter was 1” greater than the Sudanese engines,

but the boiler pressure was lower at 180 lb/ sq in. The main external difference was adoption of a streamlined profile for the front tank, the first application of this trademark of the modern Garratt; the bunker and rear tank styling remained traditional. The resultant 15th Class was much celebrated as one of the best Garratt designs to work in Africa. They introduced several changes in RR locomotive practice. The 4’ 9” driving wheel diameter was the largest yet seen and post-war they were fitted with Hadfield Power Reverse Gear. Another innovation was the use of SKF roller bearings and grease lubrication in the axleboxes of all the bogie wheels. Apart from the superior performance of this arrangement, lubrication became the sole responsibility of shed personnel. This relieved the footplate crew of much of the chore of ‘oiling round’ prior to and during journeys which greatly helped the class’s popularity. Failures on the road were a rarity which induced Sells to apply this system to three 4-8-2 rigid-frames types (classes 10th, 11th & 12th).

The very successful 15th/ 15A Class of Rhodesian Railways had its roots in the 4-6-4+4-6-4s first supplied to Sudan Government Railway in 1936, as depicted here in this official works photograph. The ‘RR’ livery has been doctored by over-painting the ‘S’ of the company’s initials on the tanks, probably to show to Rhodesian Railways management how the proposed new 15th Class might appear. (The deceit is also betrayed by the number on the cab-side – 256 was in the SR series). Apart from certain larger internal dimensions, the first batch differed in being the first Garratts with streamlined front tanks, the prominent feature of many of the post-war examples. Beyer Peacock

153

Beyer-Garratt

RR’s 15th/ 15A classes were delivered in five distinct batches. The first, which comprised only four locomotives, arrived in 1940 and introduced the new style of front tank while retaining the more traditional rear tank/ bunker profile of its Sudan Government Railway predecessor. Beyer Peacock

Other features included copper fireboxes, Ajax steamoperated fire doors, Ross pop safety valves, Stone’s electric headlamps and Atlas automatic couplers. Except for the first pair which had Davies & Metcalfe injectors, the other two (and later locomotives) had high capacity Gresham & Craven injectors. All were fitted with Laycock steam heating in view of their mixed traffic role. Larger RR rigid-framed types (4-8-0s of 7th, 8th, 9th classes and the 4-8-2s mentioned above) had coupled wheelbases varying between 12’ 0” and 13’ 7” which necessitated flangeless leading drivers to accommodate sharp track curvature. With the much larger 15th Class, all driving wheels were flanged by virtue of the 10’ 6” coupled wheelbase which allowed these engines to negotiate 275’ radius curves. The class, delivered in three batches ultimately totalled 34 with the following differences: Batch 1: The first four were shipped in sections to Beira in early 1940 and entered service between April and June. They were precluded from their intended work between Bulawayo to Mafeking in South Africa by delays in bridge strengthening on account of the war. (The class eventually reached Botswana in 1959 and Mafeking in 1966). Thus they were first allocated to Salisbury and used on freight trains to Gwelo proving capable of taking 1,400-ton loads up 1 in

80 gradients. They also occasionally hauled the ‘Rhodesia Express’ passenger service which required working 500-ton loads at speeds up to 50 mph. In 1946, their operating records based mainly on their work between Salisbury and Gwelo were analysed in detail. They were subjected to boiler washouts after three round trips (aggregate 1200 miles) and to tyre turning every 120,000 miles. Since introduction, the four locomotives had covered an aggregate mileage of almost 1,800,000 which averaged 5,900 each per month. There had been no case of a hot axlebox during the survey period which totally vindicated the decision concerning grease lubrication and roller bearings. Understandably, BP’s publicity machine made much of these statistics. For the Royal visit in 1947, the quartet were painted blue. Nos. 271/ 2 double-headed the royal train BulawayoSalisbury and return while Nos. 273/ 4 worked from Bulawayo to Livingstone in Northern Rhodesia. On each duty a single auxiliary water tender painted matching blue was inserted between the locomotives. This feature was reminiscent of South African practice with the larger Garratts from Class GM forward but does not appear to have been adopted by RR for normal service use.

Diagram for Rhodesian Railways 15th Class (first batch).

154

Inter-war six-coupled production

The second batch of RR 4-6-4+4-6-4s was introduced in 1947 of which No. 277 shown here was the third example. These engines differed in the curved side profile to the rear tank/ bunker which harmonised with that of the leading tank; the carrying capacities were unchanged from the first batch. Another change was that the leading headlight was partly recessed into the face of the leading tank. Beyer Peacock

Some of the second batch later had their coal capacity increased to 12½ tons by means of upward extension to the coal space as with No. 360 (previously No. 281) which was photographed at Bulawayo depot.

155

Beyer-Garratt

The third batch of 15th Class (this is No. 368) introduced from 1949 saw further minor changes in the revised side profile of the rear tank while the bunker now carried 12½ tons from new. Also, the cab was 5 inches wider and the front headlight was carried on a bracket prominent of the tank’s downward slope. Beyer Peacock

Later in their careers, Nos. 351-3 received upward extensions to their coal bunkers which raised capacity to 12.5 tons although the prototype remained essentially in original condition. This modification obviated the need to refuel at Dett when working from Bulawayo to Wankie. Batch 2: Nos. 275-84 [later 354-63] were delivered between September 1947 and February 1948) with detail differences. The streamlined front tank had a different curved profile and the rear tank/ bunker had matching styling; both superstructures were welded rather than rivetted as used on the first batch. There was also a different form of headlamp mounting. Some (e.g. No. 370) had their coal capacity increased to 12.5 tons by means of upward bunker extensions. Nos. 357/ 9 were transferred to Zambia Railways in 1967 and used in the Copperbelt while the others remained in Zimbabwe. Batch 3: Numbered 364-83, they were delivered between February and August 1949 and were essentially the same as Batch 2 except for a slight difference in the (welded) tank profiles, a 5” increase in the cab width, and provision of 12.5-ton coal capacity from new. More significant was a revision in the boiler design to permit an increase in working pressure to 200 lb/ sq in if desired.

Nos. 380-2 of the third batch and No. 419 of the final batch were experimentally fitted with Giesl Ejectors in 1963. Beyer Peacock

The unit price of the third batch was £39,800 which, even allowing for inflation, was a substantial real increase over the £20,100 that each of the first batch had cost. The wisdom of this investment was borne out by No. 379 which covered 12,300 miles during August 1960. Even more impressive, No. 371 in 1967 was recorded as having covered 310,000 miles between workshop visits. Combined with the later Class 15A, the 4-6-4+4-6-4 fleet sustained enviable operating efficiency with an average 86% availability factor and a failure rate of once every 61,000 miles. Such evidence from the latter days of steam showed that well-maintained, well-

156

Inter-war six-coupled production

The fourth batch of 4-6-4+4-6-4s was built by BP in 1950/1 with boiler pressure increased to 200 lb/ sq in, and accordingly classified 15A. Externally this batch was identical to the third except for having rivetted tanks as is clear with this image of No. 403. The fifth batch which comprised Nos. 414-23 was built under licence in 1952 by Société Franco-Belge (works Nos 2963-72) and was identical with the fourth. Beyer Peacock

designed locomotives built to high engineering standards could sustain operational viability comparable with diesel traction at lower capital and running cost. 15A Class Batch 4: Such was the impact of 15th Class that thirty more 4-6-4+4-6-4s numbered 384-413 entered service between March 1950 and February 1951. Classified 15A these engines had 200 lb/ sq in boilers from new. There were minor changes from Batch 3 (15th Class) but most prominent was reversion to rivetted tanks and the mounting of headlamps on brackets rather than in recesses. No. 404 was unlucky in suffering several accidents and mishaps leading to its official withdrawal in July 1970 although it concurrently re-entered the roster as No. 424 under which identity the locomotive was more fortunate. Batch 5: In the early 1950s, Gorton Foundry faced severe capacity problems which led to sub-contracting construction of the final ten locomotives (Nos. 414-23) to Société FrancoBelge of Raismes, France. This group, delivered in 1952 was identical to Batch 4 (Nos. 384-413). Completion of track up-grading meant that from 1963 the class commenced working south to Mafeking, the duties for which the 4-6-4+4-6-4s had first been conceived and they progressively supplanted 12th Class 4-8-0s on that route. By 1966, they dominated passenger trains on a caboose-crewed basis between Bulawayo and Mafeking, a distance of 484 miles in each direction and remained on that work until replaced by diesels from 1973 onwards. Thereafter they continued to work from Bulawayo to Gwelo and Victoria Falls, and to undertake lesser duties such as ballast workings. They were also lent on occasion to Zambia Railways. In 1963, Nos. 380-2 & 419 were experimentally equipped with Giesl ejectors which resulted in a 12% reduction in fuel and water consumption but the project was not extended and they later reverted to conventional blastpipe.

In later years, the delineation between 15th and 15A classes became blurred through boiler exchanges. For example, Nos. 351/ 4/ 6/ 8/ 63/ 4/ 7/ 70-2/ 4/ 6-82 received 15A-type boilers with concomitant increase in tractive effort. Further exchanges followed so that the two effectively blended into one under the 15th Class label and the only means of identifying the original batch type was by the running number. A further cause for confusion lay in the progressive replacement from 1954 onwards of the seven peripheral smokebox door retaining clips with a central locking wheel. During the Garratt refurbishment programme of the early 1980s, rebuilding, modification and cannibalisation made identification of an individual progeny even harder. Late survivors remained at work into the 1990s and some were still in normal service in the 21st Century (see ‘Last Bastions’ in Chapter 13). Sierra Leone Government Railway [Gauge 2’ 6”] This system started from the capital Freetown and stretched for 227 miles eastward up-country. The climb from the coastal terminus was demanding over the first 20-odd miles and it was to cope with this section that a fleet of 2-6-2+26-2 Garratts was acquired from 1926 onward. The track was lightly laid with 30 lb/ yd rail and sleepers further apart than the norm which placed acute constraint upon axle loadings. These engines handled maximum loads of 200 tons up 1 in 50 gradients at around 10 mph. In peacetime circumstances, this proved sufficient to meet operational demands and no significant design improvements were necessary with the repeat orders of 1928/ 9. Before introduction of the Garratts, heavier trains were doubled-headed (2-6-2T plus 4-8-0) and comparative consumption tests found conclusively in favour of the Gorton product (see overleaf). The seven locomotives were sufficient to cope with pre-war traffic and the design was repeated with minor differences

157

Beyer-Garratt

Side view of Rhodesian Railways Class 15A No. 403. Beyer Peacock

in two locomotives delivered to Nepal Government Railways in 1932 and 1947.

However, Sierra Leone assumed strategic significance in World War 2 when Freetown became an important convoy assembly port. Combined with increased military activities throughout the colony, significantly greater demands were placed on motive power. Six more Garratts were ordered

have not been traced but presumably new frames and extra driving wheels were manufactured at Gorton and shipped to Freetown for the work to be carried out in the SGLR’s well-equipped workshops. Also, the locomotives so treated had their boiler pressure increased to 200 lb/ sq in, which would have raised the tractive effort to 17,140 lb. Sources conflict on the identity of the locomotives involved in this programme but these details are believed to be accurate, with the usual caveat concerning inaccuracies that can prevail in wartime. This was a rare example of a BP Garratt undergoing post-delivery change of wheel arrangement. Some of these engines are thought to have remained in service until complete closure of the SGLR system in 1976.

through the War Department in 1942, two of which were built on ‘Civil Account’ and four on ’War Department Account’; they were allocated WD Nos. 3800-5 but these identities were never applied. They were apparently similar to the pre-war deliveries but study of photographs indicates that the cab was enlarged at the expense of floor area of the rear tank whose sides were raised to compensate. Nos. 57/ 8 (works Nos. 7049/ 50) were reported as delivered in December 1943 apparently preceded by Nos. 59-62 (works Nos. 7045-8) in February/ March 1943. War-time traffic levels led to difficulties in sustaining adhesion, especially with near empty tanks so conversions to 2-8-0+0-8-2 wheel arrangement were effected in 1944 (No. 56) and in 1945 [Nos. 52-5]. Some or all of the six built in 1942/ 3 were also included in this programme but dates are not recorded. Details of how the conversions were effected 158

Inter-war six-coupled production

Sierra Leone Government Railways 2-6-2+2-6-2 No. 50, a diminutive design which nonetheless revolutionised the system’s operations, just as did its much larger relatives on other systems. Beyer Peacock

SGLR 2-6-2+2-6-2 No 57 was the first of the locomotives delivered in 1942/ 3. Detail differences from the earlier series are apparent. Beyer Peacock

During World War 2, SLGR’s services came under severe pressure and to help cope, some of the most recently delivered engines plus some from the earlier series were converted to 2-8-0+0-8-2 wheel arrangement, presumably through supply of components manufactured at Gorton and fitted at Freetown works. This is one of the rebuilt locomotives in derelict condition after the system had closed. D. Trevor Rowe

159

Beyer-Garratt

Diagram for SLGR 2-6-2+2-6-2 Garratt.

London Midland & Scottish Railway (Gauge 4’ 8.5”) These 2-6-0+0-6-2s were acquired to replace 0-6-0s that had traditionally double-headed coal trains over the exMidland Railway main line to London. Elimination of this wasteful practice required larger locomotives and in a confused period of LMS locomotive development, a freight 2-8-2 was considered by one camp while the MR-orientated management at Derby favoured a Garratt. The latter option eventually prevailed with insistence that several MR standards should be adopted although design of frames and boiler was left in BP’s hands. Certain Derby-inspired features would prove regressive: ex-MR undersized axleboxes; shortlap valves; 5’ 3” driving wheels; wheelbase identical with 0-6-0 Class 4. The axleboxes required more workshop attention than should have been the norm. The short-lap valves resulted in a higher rate of fuel consumption. The wheel diameter was curiously deemed necessary to match that of the 0-60s whereas smaller-wheeled Garratts overseas worked comparative loads at higher speeds over longer distances. The driving wheelbase was a significant constraint. Excluding industrial engines in Australia and the first War

Department Garratts built under emergency circumstances, these were the last six- or eight-coupled engines built without inboard trailer trucks or bogies. A 2-6-2+2-6-2 would have rode better with greater operational flexibility through lower axle loadings. The overall length was 87’ 10.5” compared with 87’ 3” for the LNER 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class U1 which was 29 tons heavier. Locomotive length, a generic shortcoming, was often of little consequence overseas but could be a hindrance at crowded locomotive depots. Despite Derby’s close participation in the design process, there was inadequate recognition of operating realities during planning with no thought given to negotiation of the hump at Toton marshalling yard. On the first occasion, the leading wheels left the rails as they passed over the hump and then the power unit tilted with the rear headstock fouling the boiler cradle. Then the leading driving wheels of the rear unit pierced the cab floor. In contrast to these tribulations, the free hand allowed to BP resulted in an entirely satisfactory boiler. Three locomotives (Nos. 4997-9) were acquired in 1927. Trials using a dynamometer car proved that the average speed of 21 mph for an Up loaded train weighing 1,450 tons was feasible, as compared with 18 mph for a pair of

The first London Midland Scottish Railway Garratt was No. 4997 (later No. 7997) delivered in 1927 with the rectangular coal bunker. Evidence that the design might have been intended for a wider range of duties than heavy freight haulage is found in the original equipment (vacuum brakes and screw-link couplings) which was later removed. This equipment was omitted from the later production run of 30 locomotives. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

160

Inter-war six-coupled production

Diagram for LMS Garratt prototype.

0-6-0s. Down trains comprising 100 empty wagons could be worked at an average of 24.4 mph. The net reduction in fuel consumption was claimed to be 15-20%, although later experience cast doubt on this statistic. Improved operating speeds reduced the risk of impeding faster services which was important for timetabling on a busy mainline. The main batch Based on the trial results, thirty more were introduced in 1930. Although under order Nos. 1164/ 5, this was a single transaction and numerically the largest handled by Gorton until South African Railways Class GEA (50 locomotives delivered 1945-7). Performance was improved by fitting double exhaust valves but previously-identified design shortcomings remained. The vacuum brake fitted to the first three was excluded, confirming their use solely on nonfitted freight trains. The aggregate water capacity remained at 4500 gallons but the leading tank was increased in size to a capacity of 3030 gallons and equipped with two-way water pickup. This measure helped journey times as the previously employed 0-6-0s had required two or three water stops en route, accommodated by cranes installed in ‘tandem’ to fill two tenders concurrently. Despite the double water cranes, no consideration was given to how best to fill the Garratts’ tanks. It was hard to align the filler on the leading tank with the crane so the rear filler was preferred but the small diameter equalisation pipe extended filling time. It became practice to keep the rear tank full as a reserve and to rely on the pick-up gear to replenish the leading tank. The main batch had slightly taller chimneys and bunker capacity was enlarged to 9 tons with sides slanted inwards at the top to avoid the need for coal rails. The overall length, scarcity of reversing triangles and resultant necessity to do half their work in reverse led to introduction of the enclosed rotary bunker, as described in Chapter 2. Hot axle boxes were a recurrent problem although no worse than with other types fitted with the under-sized exMR version. Other snags included inaccurate water gauge mechanisms and growing incidence in steam pipe leakage,

leading to deterioration in steaming rates and increased fuel consumption. Mileages between intermediate repairs generally averaged 25,000 with about 55,000 between heavy repairs at roughly 30-month intervals. These figures were unimpressive compared with mileages regularly recorded by several overseas types but it was noted that the fleet replaced 68 ‘old freight tender engines’ and saved one crew on every train. In retrospect, the trial period with the first three was probably too short and inadequately monitored before proceeding with the main order. At that point, it would have been sensible to commission BP to conduct a thorough revision of the design. The operating shortcomings outlined made them unpopular with footplate and shed staff but there appeared to be minimal management interest in rectification. However, eventually in 1937 the manufacturers were approached for ideas on possible improvements. BP quoted £2,850 per locomotive to rebuild as 2-6-2+2-62s with new frames and axleboxes but the Vice-President responsible for locomotive matters ruled that no action should be taken. Slow decline followed, and overall the project probably fell well short of the advantages originally sought. They mainly worked between Toton and Brent, North London (126.5 miles) moving coal from the Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire coalfields but also occasionally reached Peterborough and Birmingham/ Bristol. They were initially allocated to Toton, Cricklewood and Wellingborough, and later some were based at Hasland. Withdrawals were effected in 1955 [7 locomotives], 1956 [13], 1957 [12] with the last survivor going in April 1958. They were replaced by BR standard Class 9F 2-10-0s. In retrospect, it seems a shame that they were not tried on the West Coast Main Line as trials over Shap and Beattock might have identified the haulage potential of a properly designed Garratt.

161

Beyer-Garratt

No. 4994 of the production batch of 30 LMS Garratts as originally built with conventional bunker with the upper sections of the sides slanted inwards. FR Hebron

LMS Garratt in final condition as BR No. 47974 with the rotary bunker and deeper front tank. The last example was withdrawn in 1958.

Diagram for LMS Garratt with rotary bunker.

162

Inter-war six-coupled production SPR Class R1 was intended to work passenger trains from the top of the inclines at Alto de Serra to Jundiahy, a distance of 70 miles. This section included gradients of 1 in 40 and speeds up to 60 mph (the fastest yet officially sanctioned for a Garratt) were necessary for a start-to-stop average of 40 mph hauling loads up to 500 tons. Nos. 160-4 were built with conventional valve motion and piston valves whereas No. 165 was equipped with Lentz oscillating cam poppet valves actuated by Walschaerts motion, apparently in the standard BP format with separate steam chests to facilitate easy conversion to piston valves. How long No. 165 retained poppet valves is unknown but quite possibly it was standardised with the other five, concurrent with the conversion to 4-6-2+2-6-4 wheel arrangement described below. After four years’ service, they were converted to ‘doublePacifics’ in the railway’s workshops at Lapa using parts designed and manufactured at Gorton. The reasons were to improve riding qualities and to increase water capacity but the tank capacity was raised by only 900 gallons. It seems probable that the former was the principal motivation for what was a major modification. The frames were cut ahead of the outer driving axleboxes and a single cast extension added to support the original cylinders and valve gear, and to accommodate new bogies, as described in Chapter 2. Other new equipment comprised longer connecting rods, new eccentric rods, four wheel bogie frames and additional carrying wheel sets. This degree of post-delivery modification to an existing Garratt indicated that the prairie-style power bogie was unsuitable for higher speeds. The solitary South African 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class GG introduced in 1925 had been intended for express work but was reported to have encountered similar poor riding problems which is why that type was not multiplied. It was strange that this experience was ignored with design of the São Paulo engines. Later express passenger Garratts built under licence were all doublePacifics. São Paulo Railway, Brazil [Gauge 5’ 3”] (Estrada de Ferro Santos a Jundiai) As described in Chapter 4, this railway had overcome operating challenges on its lightly-built lower section by recourse to three 2-4-0+0-4-2 Garratts. BP was approached to produce another unusual variant of the type in the six members of 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class R1, later modified to 4-6-2+26-4 Class R2. In the comparative tests conducted in South Africa (Chapter 5), a key result was the Garratt’s ability to run at higher speeds than a Mallet could safely manage. Although contemplated as a freight locomotive, it was evident that the type had potential for express passenger service. By 1927, South African Railways 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class GE was regularly used on long distance passenger trains but Saö Paulo Railway Class R1 was a rare example of a purposedesigned express passenger Garratt. Other manufacturers working under licence to BP built examples of the genre. 163

Beyer-Garratt

The 2-6-2+2-6-2s of the São Paulo Railway (Class R1) were rare examples of Garratts built by BP specifically for express passenger duties. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Side view of São Paulo Railway Class R1 2-6-2+2-6-2. Science Museum

A São Paulo Railway Class R1 ‘double prairie’ at work on a passenger service.

164

Inter-war six-coupled production

Diagram of São Paulo Railway 2-6-2+2-6-2 as built.

After modification, the impressive SPR engines remained at work on the duties for which they had been built until 1950 when declared redundant following route electrification. Dimensions following modification:

Assam Bengal Railway [Metre gauge] This railway was situated in rugged country in the northeastern corner of India bordering Burma (now Myanmar), China and what is modern day Bangladesh. Five Garratts (Class T Nos. 401-5) were ordered specifically to work 300-ton loads over the 115-mile section from Badarpur to Lumding with a stretch of 11 miles, almost all at 1 in 37. These trains still required assistance whereas the preceding 4-8-0s with similar help could only manage 230 tons. In 1942, the company was amalgamated with the East Bengal 165

Beyer-Garratt

Railway to form the Bengal Assam Railway under which they became BAR Class GT Nos. 191-5. Following a collision between Nos 191 & 194, the two were cannibalised to form a renewed No. 194. On Partition in 1947, the section over which the Garratts worked remained part of India and in the grouping of 1951/ 2, the system became the North Eastern Railway, and then in 1958 the North East Frontier Railway. Following identities were BAR Nos. 192-5/ AR Nos. 671-4/ NER & NEFR Nos. 971-4/ and finally from 1957 All India List Nos. 32078-81 but withdrawal dates are unrecorded (for dimensions, refer Page 168). The Bengal Assam Railway also made use of War Department Garratts during World War 2 (see Chapter 14). Ceylon Government Railways [Gauge 5’ 6”] In 1927, the CGR acquired a single Garratt classified C1 as a prototype to work over the Kandyan mountain section. From Rambakkana the main line climbs 1,400 feet in 13 miles with a ruling gradient of 1 in 45 and 10 chain radius curves to reach Kadugannawa. This engine was built specifically for this section and successfully replaced pairs of 4-6-0s previously used with a 20% reduction in fuel consumption. Notwithstanding this satisfactory performance, 13 years elapsed before more were sought. An order for four was

Top. A poor quality photograph that depicts one of the São Paulo engines following conversion to 4-6-2 power bogies, and re-classification as R2. Above. Diagram of São Paulo Railway Class R2 4-6-2+26-4 following rebuild.

placed through the Crown Agents in 1941 and for another four the following year but war-time conditions delayed delivery until 1945. The later engines were classified C1A with some minor dimensional differences but most significantly they were the first locomotives to be fitted with Hadfield Power Reverse Gear. They were also equipped with thermic syphons. Withdrawals apparently started in the 1970s but Nos 343/ 50 were noted in 1980 either under repair or stored out of use. No. 348 was photographed at Dematagoda, Colombo on 22 August 1980 minus fittings, coupling rods and motion. Vegetation encircling the boiler was indicative of a career terminated. Ceylon Government Railways Class C1 No. 241 was the last Garratt completed before expiry of the original patent granted 11 June 1908.

166

Inter-war six-coupled production

The superstructure (excluding the leading tank) of Assam Bengal Railway 2-6-2+2-6-2 No 401 shows a significant similarity to that of Burma Railways 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class GA II/ III.The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Ceylon Government Railways Class C1 No. 241 introduced in 1927 proved entirely satisfactory but no more were added until 1945. Beyer Peacock

Diagram for CGR Class C1.

167

Beyer-Garratt

Assam Bengal Railway

Ceylon Government Railways

There were minor detail differences with Class C1A introduced in 1945 but the most important change was that this was the first type to be fitted with the Hadfield Power Reverse. Beyer Peacock

168

Inter-war six-coupled production

One of the Guayaquil & Quito Railway’s trio but not necessarily that whose boiler fell into the estuary prior to arrival at the railhead for assembly of the locomotive. Science Museum

New Zealand Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] The story of NZR 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class G is told in Chapter 9. Guayaquil & Quito Railway, Ecuador [Gauge 3’ 6”] (later part of Empresa de los Ferrocarriles del Estado Ecuatoriano) This extraordinary railway was built by American interests to connect Guayaquil, a port on the Pacific coast of Ecuador with the capital city of Quito. The railhead for Guayaquil is at Duran on the other bank of the Rio Guyas estuary and having traversed the flat coastal plain, the line starts to rise into the Andes foothills reaching an altitude of almost 1,000 feet at Bucay, about 50 miles inland. Then in the next section of a little over 50 miles, the line climbs 9,660 feet to reach Palmira by means of an average gradient of 1 in 28 with sections at 1 in 18 uncompensated, equating 1 in 15. This part of the climb included tackling the zig-zag reversing section of the Narez del Diablo (Devil’s Nose) mountain. Thereafter the line was more undulating, reaching the highest altitude of 11,841 feet at Urbina and continuing at close to that altitude on to Quito. Another complication was that the connection between Guayaquil, and Duran required the use of ferries. The three Garratts delivered in 1929 were shipped to the sea port in major component form in the normal manner and then across the river on lighters. One of these suffered a mishap and deposited a boiler in 36 feet of water, from which it was eventually recovered. There were no workshop facilities and no crane at Duran, so assembly took place in the open using jacks and timber packing. Hitherto, the railway’s locomotives and equipment had been entirely of US origin and selection of the Garratt type was intriguing. The motive power mainstay was sturdy 2-8-0s but Shays [1901] and 0-6-6-0 Baldwin Mallets [1905] were also tried and apparently found wanting. Unfortunately nothing further has been traced of the surrounding circumstances, otherwise this would have formed another case study for inclusion in Chapter 5 ‘Garratt versus the rest’. However, comparative data with the 2-8-0s reveals interesting results that were contrary to the rather arbitrary tests conducted by the North West Railway (India) in 1924:

While acknowledging the theoretical element in tractive effort as a comparative measure of haulage ability, the nominal increase of 60% for approximately the same total locomotive weight was a substantial advance. Train loads for the 2-8-0s were limited to about 100 tons so an estimated 60% extra haulage capacity would yield a profound effect in operating economics. The comparison also scotched the variable adhesive weight argument advanced by Mallet supporters and also the theoretical nonsense that disqualified the Russian giant (Chapter 10).

The timing was unfortunate as the Depression engendered a significant drop in freight tonnage and despite later economic recovery, there were no more acquisitions of articulated locomotives. It is possible that locomotive length might have complicated operations on the zig-zag reversing section thus negating an advantage through deployment of an even more effective eight-coupled Garratt. The three Garratts were oil-burners, stoutly constructed with bar frames, Belpaire fireboxes, Walschaerts valve gear, and Worthington feed water heaters. At least one was noted with a round-topped boiler in later years but there seems to be no record of how it was obtained. The G&Q retained some steam power until 1984 but the Garratts were withdrawn in 1960. (See overleaf for dimensions). Transandine Railway [Metre gauge] (later part of Ferrocarril General Belgrano) This British-owned international railway crossed the Andes from Mendoza in Argentina to Los Andes in Chile with the summit of the line in a tunnel under the border at an altitude of 10,400 feet. On the steepest (rack-equipped) sections, dual rack-and-adhesion Kitson-Meyer engines

169

Beyer-Garratt

Guayaquil & Quito Railway

were used. Over an 80-mile lower section where conditions were less extreme, the route climbed 4500 feet at gradients no more severe than 1 in 40 but sharp curves abounded. Four Garratts were supplied in 1929 to work alongside 2-64 and 2-8-4 tank engines over this part of the system. The BP product was based upon engines supplied to the New Cape Central Railway (later South African Railways Class GK) but with larger fireboxes to cope with the more demanding conditions. Part of the Transandine was out of use for five years following destruction through flooding of a significant length of track which left two Garratts isolated from the rest of the system. The others were temporarily re-deployed to the GuemesLa Quiaca rack-and-adhesion route where 380-ton trains were worked up 1 in 11 inclines. The Garratts were used as bankers to help the rack-equipped Kitson-Meyers. No details have been traced of the Garratts’ ultimate fate. Rio Tinto Company, Spain [Gauge 3’ 6”] This 52-mile industrial system connected sulphur extraction and mining activities in the Sierra Morena mountains of Andalusia with the port of Huelva in south-western Spain. The railway was owned by Rio Tinto Zinc (a British company) until 1954 when it and the associated extraction interests were sold to Spanish investors. The railway had used motive power (0-6-0Ts and 0-8-0Ts) supplied by BP from 1875 and in 1930, a pair of Garratts were acquired. There were several Garratts at work in Spain but the Rio Tinto engines were the only examples built at Gorton; the remainder were built under licence by other manufacturers. Operations were quite straightforward with a single locomotive descending with loads up to 2000 tons while empty return trains weighed 500 tons. The route was well-engineered so that the steepest gradient was 1 in 50. The Garratts apparently worked into the 1960s but were definitely out of service by 1970. One has been broken up and the other retained for preservation. These engines were to the same basic design as the Garratts supplied to Dundee Coal & Coke Co and Consolidated Main Reef Gold Mining Co in South Africa.

The Transandine engines were the interesting product of cross fertilisation, having been developed from the New Cape Central Railway Class G (later South African Railways Class GK). Science Museum

170

Inter-war six-coupled production

Transandine Railway

Rio Tinto Company

One of the Transandine locomotives at work. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

171

Beyer-Garratt

The Garratt type was quite popular in Spain with some interesting variants but the only Gorton-built examples were the pair supplied to British-owned Rio Tinto Company. Beyer Peacock

Buenos Aires Midland Railway [Metre gauge] (later part of Ferrocarril General Belgrano) This British-owned private company was formed in 1906 but two years later came under the joint operation and management of the Buenos Aires Western and Buenos Aires Great Southern railways. By 1933, the system had grown to 322 route miles from Puente Alsina near Buenos Aires in a south-westerly direction to Carhue. Two Garratts were supplied in 1930 which BP later described as ‘one of the early examples of the Pacific wheel arrangement and illustrates the versatility of the Garratt principle’. They were fitted with bar frames and Worthington feed water heater. Apart from small differences in wheel diameters, fuel and water capacities, these locomotives were identical with a pair of double-Pacifics supplied to the Leopoldina Railway, Brazil (works Nos. 6572/ 3) the same year. The BA Midland’s trackwork was lightly laid over a route described as ‘comparatively level’ with moderate gradients and curves of minimum 500 metres radius. The Garratts, the only BP engines supplied to this company, handled

grain and merchandise traffic with loads up to 1600 tons at speeds around 25 mph. During World War 2, one was lent to the Antofagasta (Chili) and Bolivia Railway where it worked between Oruro and Uyuni. This system was nationalised in 1948; there is no record of withdrawals. Leopoldina Railway, Brazil [Metre gauge] (Estrada de Ferro Leopoldina) This British-owned company was formed through amalgamation/ absorption of 38 different systems which resulted in the largest metre gauge network in Brazil comprising 1,918 route miles. It penetrated several mountainous areas resulting in steep gradients and tight track curvature. The complexity of the process by which the company expanded meant that it acquired a variety of locomotives, rolling stock and equipment of varying quality and size. This railway was a faithful customer between 1899 and 1948. BP supplied 94 locomotives of which four 4-62Ts Nos. 366/7/9/70 (works Nos. 7020/1/3/4) were lost at sea in the Second World War and replaced by another order for four completed in 1948. Over the years, those delivered comprised 2-6-0s [15], 2-8-0s [8], 4-6-2s [39], and

The only BP products sold to Buenos Aires Midland Railway Company were a pair of double-Pacifics. Apart from some dimensional differences, they were identical with the double-Pacifics of the Leopoldina Railway, described next.

172

Inter-war six-coupled production

Buenos Aires Midland Railway

4-6-2Ts [8]. Garratts consisted of sixteen double-Pacifics as described here and four of 2-4-2+2-4-2 wheel arrangement (reviewed in Chapter 7). The first two Garratts acquired in 1930 shared many mechanical parts with preceding 4-6-2s and were 60% more powerful than any other type on the railway. Burning timber or briquettes, they were particularly successful in working heavy overnight passenger services over the 323-kilometre route between Campos and Victoria through difficult country with a ruling gradient of 1 in 33 and numerous curves of 80 metres radius. These trains were 75% heavier than a conventional pacific could manage, and were worked at faster overall speeds. Their effectiveness led to an order for six more, delivered in 1937. During the war, these engines were successfully used on heavy ore trains. A further eight were ordered in 1943 but with delivery delayed by wartime conditions, they did not arrive in Brazil until 1946. Following completion of bridge up-grading, they were also used in the Minas region from Alto da Sierra to Caratinga, and from Porto Nuvo to Uba and Manhuassu. The three batches were almost identical except the 1946 engines presented a neater appearance with the rear main steam pipe mounted below the centre section running plate as opposed to above with the earlier versions. All three batches reportedly were withdrawn between 1964 and 1969.

The Leopoldina Railway, Brazil was an established BP customer and the principal purchases were these handsome timber-burning Double Pacifics which worked several passenger services. Beyer Peacock

173

Beyer-Garratt

Leopoldina Railway

Nepal Government Railways [Gauge 2’ 6”] This 24-mile line was built from Raxaul where it connected with the metre gauge system of India Railways to Simra, where the high mountains of Nepal’s southern frontier commence. From there northward the ruling gradient was 1 in 30 with 330 feet radius curves. The northern terminus was at Amlekhganj beyond which a roadway and ropeway connected with Kathmandu, the capital. In December 1965, the railway was reduced to a shorter cross-border section between Janakhpur in Nepal and Jaynagar in India where it connected with the modern Indian Railways broad gauge network. Based on locomotives supplied to Sierra Leone Government Railways, the first Garratt was obtained in 1932 to work the daily freight over the full length of the line, and a second with detailed improvements was delivered in 1947. These engines had been designed to burn timber although they occasionally used coal. They were considered to perform well on trains loaded up to 150 tons in the system’s happier days. Dieselisation was achieved in the late 20th Century using locomotives donated by Indian Railways. A documentary film made about 2014 for BBC 4 television described NGR’s operations with its sole working but decrepit diesel locomotive still providing a vital lifeline for the impoverished local community. The film included views of long withdrawn steam locomotives at the railway’s workshops at Khajuri. The two Garratts were visible and BP works plate No. 6736 in remarkably good condition was still in situ. Having been reduced to a short cross-border line, the Nepal system finally closed in 2014 pending eventual replacement by a Broad Gauge connection to be built by Indian Railways.

One of the Leopoldina Railway locomotives paused en route on a passenger train. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

174

Inter-war six-coupled production

Nepal Government Railways 2-6-2+2-6-2 No. 6 clearly shows is similarity with the Sierra Leone Garratts. Beyer Peacock

Nigerian Government Railway

175

Beyer-Garratt

Nigerian Government Railway Class 501 was introduced because the previously introduced pair of 4-8-2+2-8-4s proved too powerful for prevailing traffic demands. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Diagram for NGR Class 501.

Nigerian Government Railway [Gauge 3’ 6”] Having established that this company’s first two Garratts (delivered in 1930) with their 4-8-2+2-8-4 wheel arrangement were too powerful for normal traffic needs, four smaller 4-6-2+2-6-4s were acquired in 1936. They proved ideal for through working from the Lagos area (laid with 80 lb/ yd rail) to the north where 45 lb/ yd rail was used. The type proved entirely suitable for the system’s needs and twentytwo locomotives were supplied as summarised on Page 175. The NGR’s engine mileage, which for 1939/ 40 was 4,438,000, had risen to 7,076,000 by 1944/ 5. The average

monthly mileages for this class by then were almost 3,000. Nos 501-4 are believed to have been withdrawn in 1954. The fate of the others is unknown but Nos. 519 & 521 were noted on the dump at Ebute Metta, Lagos in 1981. Australian Portland Cement Proprietary Ltd, Victoria [Gauge 3’ 6”] This company operated a 3½ mile line from its limestone quarry at Batesford near Geelong, Victoria to the cement works at Fyansford. Although short, the route had 1 in 36 gradients, curves of 6 chains radius, sidings of 4 chains radius, and a tunnel which at 4736’ was the longest in the

Purpose-built Fyansford No. 1 spent its entire career working on a 3½ mile long industrial line near Geelong in the state of Victoria, Australia. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

176

Inter-war six-coupled production

Australian Portland Cememt Pty

BP introduced the new wheel arrangement of 4-6-4+4-64 for the only Garratt type supplied to Sudan Railways. This is SR No. 252 as built. These locomotives had to work under remarkably arduous conditions over lightlylaid track. They were replaced by diesels soon after the war. Beyer Peacock

state. A round trip operated every half hour with a train of six loaded wagons weighing 168 tons. Although the daily distances covered were modest, the stress on the boiler was substantial with wide variations in firebox temperature that damaged the tubeplate. Recognising the success of Victorian Government Railways’ Class G 2-6-0+0-6-2, the company acquired their own example for this arduous work. BP emphasised its similarity with VGR Class G which was stretching the point. The design had more in common with WAGR Class Ms of 1913, except for an improved cab, provision of top feed and some other minor changes. A second example was procured in 1939 and numbered 2. Garratts retired from mainline service found second careers in industrial use, particularly in South Africa and Rhodesia, but No. 2 was the last built specifically for this purpose. The Fyansford Garratts were withdrawn in 1966 with closure of this industrial railway. Sudan Government Railway [Gauge 3’ 6”] This railway, much of which was laid with 50/ 52 lb per yard rail, operated in hostile desert conditions with high ambient temperatures and where water supplies were intermittent. Introduced in 1936 as the first 4-6-4+4-6-4s to be built, they were purchased to meet two key objectives:- [1] to cope with heavy trains over the 50 mile-section between Port Sudan and Atbara which included 16 miles at 1 in 100 and [2] to run trains from Atbara to Khartoum (75 lb rail) and on from there to Wad Medani (50 lb rail). Atbara-Wad Medani and return was a distance of about 600 miles, worked as a single roster with relief footplate crews travelling in a caboose. 177

Beyer-Garratt

Sudan 4-6-4+4-6-4 in very clean condition suggesting that it was newly delivered to the operator.

The Garratts were built with an unusual form of equalised springing whereby the inner bogies and the coupled wheels were equalised in a single group. The bogie supported the engine unit by means of a vertical sliding pillar which was linked by a central equalising beam and a cross beam to the group of springs for the coupled wheels. The system failed to live up to expectation because desert dust stirred up by the leading power bogies contaminated the moving parts of the following unit. The problem was sufficiently severe for the class to be out of service by the end of the war. Despite modifications, motive policy changed in favour of early dieselisation and they were sold to Rhodesia Railways in 1949. The springing modifications were considered satisfactory and only alterations to the couplers were needed before entering service as RR ‘17th Class’ Nos 271 -80.

In Rhodesia they first worked between Bulawayo and Livingstone but were later relegated to the Gwelo-Gatooma freight services, and to shunting. By the early 1960s, they were in store and then sold en bloc to Mozambique Railways in 1964 becoming that system’s Nos. 921-30. By the mid1970s at least one had been withdrawn but some may have remained in service until the early 1980s.

The ‘double-Baltic’ wheel arrangement yielded suitable weight distribution and provided space for the large tank capacity needed to cope with desert conditions. They provided the design base for the initial members of Rhodesian Railways 4-6-4+4-6-4 15th Class introduced in 1940 which formed the nucleus of RR’s highly successful fleet. They differed from the 4-6-4+4-6-4s built new for RR in their slightly smaller dimensions and their traditional style tanks. They worked alongside their ‘descendant’ RR 15th and 15A classes against which they were compared unfavourably. Performance-wise there seems to have been little difference and their relative unpopularity apparently stemmed from their fully enclosed cabs which had been necessary for dusty desert conditions. Care had been taken to provide ventilation but clearly not as effectively as the traditional RR open-backed cab style. (Temperatures throughout the year were typically around 11O Celsius higher in the Sudan). 178

Inter-war six-coupled production Dorada Railway, Colombia [Gauge 3’ 0”] (later part of Ferrocarriles Nacionales de Colombia) This British-owned company operated 70 miles of route more or less parallel with the Magdalena River which climbed about 1500 feet between La Dorada (roughly 60 miles north east of Bogata, the capital) and Ambalema. Two Garratts, the only BP products purchased by the company, were acquired to handle 350-ton loads over the 1 in 50 gradients of the difficult Honda-Marequita section. Most the world’s 3’ 0” gauge route mileage was in Central and South America and these were the only Garratts built by BP to that specification. They had bar frames, welded steel fireboxes with thermic syphons, Westinghouse automatic and straight air brakes, and were oil-fired. No. 18 was withdrawn in 1955 and No 17 (by then No. 174 of Colombia National Railways) five years later.

Below. Diagram for Sudan Railways 4-6-4+4-6-4. Bottom. Most of Colombia’s railway network was 3’ 0” gauge including the British-owned Dorada Railway. The pair supplied to this system were the only Garratts built by BP to this gauge. Beyer Peacock

179

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 9 : Failure in New Zealand

Official photograph of New Zealand Railways Class G No. 98. NZ Railways Publicity

he Beyer-Garratt story was one of sustained, near universal success. Against this pattern, the three locomotives supplied to New Zealand were atypical in the complexity of their creation and design, in the multiple difficulties encountered in service, and in their unique fate. For these reasons they are accorded their own chapter. With mountainous terrain, steep gradients and sharplycurved alignments, New Zealand was ideal Garratt territory. The type’s versatility had been proven in a variety of operating situations, aided by its essential simplicity. Build quality and ease of maintenance had helped its acceptance where other forms of large locomotive would have been impracticable. Further, there was powerful goodwill towards the ‘Mother Country’ and its manufactured products. The belief that Garratts would revolutionise services with heavier trains and faster schedules was embarrassingly confounded, dashing hopes of further sales, ruining the type’s reputation locally, and turning locomotives in question into unwanted orphans. The late WW Stewart, photographer, artist, author, and doyen of Kiwi railway enthusiasts dubbed the Garratt ‘the conqueror that failed to conquer’ in a saga that is well documented but complex.

and proceeded up the western side of the island to reach Auckland over a 426-mile mainly single track route that traversed difficult terrain, especially over the 140-mile central section. NZR built the other line which ran up the Hutt Valley, climbed into the Rimutaka Hills, and then descended to the Wairarapa plain before following the eastern seaboard northwards. Operations in both directions on the climb to the station appropriately named Summit were difficult but southbound services faced the greater challenge. In three miles from Cross Creek near Featherston, the line rose 869 feet mainly at 1 in 15 with short stretches at 1 in 13, and curves as sharp as five-chain radius. Equipped with the Fell system, this section was worked by a fleet of six 0-4-2Ts. Up to five locomotives could be required – one leading, three bankers inserted at regular intervals within the consist, and another at the rear. Trains were re-marshalled at Cross Creek and then again at Summit, adding considerably to elapsed journey times. Construction of the 5.5-mile Rimutaka Tunnel commenced in 1947 to link Upper Hutt with Featherston; it was opened in October 1955 and used only by dieselpowered services.

The central section of the Main Trunk has always been Background an operating challenge. From Taihape (160 miles from New Zealand’s capital Wellington sits beside a natural harbour Wellington) to Te Kuiti (125 miles south of Auckland), at the southern end of the North Island as the country’s the route follows a twisting, undulating course through internal transport hub. Two railway routes converge north mountainous terrain rising to about 2,600 feet above sea of the port from where a ferry service connects with the level. The usually heavier southbound trains face six miles at South Island. In steam days both routes presented serious 1 in 50 between Kakahi and Owhango and seven at 1 in 50 operating challenges. The North Island Main Trunk line (the on the Raurimu Spiral. These inclines included a profusion ‘Main Trunk’), the southern end of which was built by the of short-radius curves. independent Wellington and Manawatu Railway (taken over by New Zealand Railways in 1908) climbed the Ngaio bank EH Hiley surveyed the system following his appointment as to a summit shortly before the outer suburb of Johnsonville. General Manager in November 1913 and noted numerous It then descended more gently to sea level at Paekakariki matters that required improvement. The dominant traffic 180

Failure in New Zealand

North Island network in 1930. DMC

constraint was axle loading which would take years to correct of the teething problems encountered with their 3’ 6” gauge and Hiley identified a need for up to ten Garratts to avoid Garratts had been corrected and complete success was double-heading. Although the 4-8-2 four-cylinder Vauclain anticipated. Further exchanges at CME level led to a visit to Compound Class X was doing well on the Main Trunk, he Tasmania by a Locomotive Inspector as described in Chapter believed that Garratts could do better. He consulted the 4. This study persuaded NZR to proceed. Railway Commissioner in Tasmania who reported that many 181

Beyer-Garratt On 14 November 1914, BP’s Sydney representatives quoted £4,970 per unit for a batch of six locomotives as an improved version of Tasmanian Railways 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class L. Construction would take 43 weeks from date of order confirmation. The CME stated that for delivery by Christmas 1915, the project should be authorised immediately. Two weeks later, further action was shelved as it was feared that evolving war conditions might prevent on-time importation. In October 1922, BP resurrected the issue through despatch to Wellington of the pamphlet The Advantages of Articulated Locomotives by Cyril Williams which included details of the Garratt versus Mallet trials in South Africa. It was emphasised that much double-heading could be eliminated but NZR concluded that prevailing conditions were unfavourable. Nevertheless, sales efforts persisted through the following proposals:

South America before becoming Manager of the Superheater Company (of which Fay was a director). He was a personal friend of Fay and a staunch advocate of the Garratt principle but his suitability as CME came into question in the light of later events and his contract was not renewed. In 1927, manufacturers were invited to tender for supply of articulated locomotives with the following results: (see below). Any conclusions drawn from the cancelled 1914 project were ignored in favour of a larger design over which there was evident confusion. While in England in 1926, JG Coates, the NZ Prime Minister [1925-8] (and also Minister for Railways [1923-8]) was advised by Cammell Laird that they had destruction-tested the standard NZR wagon drawgear and had calculated that the maximum tractive effort of new locomotive types should be 30,000 lb. They added that while 4- and 6-cylinder options were being considered, the former should be preferred. An issue apparently excluded from evaluation was that much of NZR’s freight rolling stock was relatively weak with semi-timber frames and timber headstocks. Coates advised the NZR Board that he understood the design and q u o t a t i o n s requested of BP had been for a 6-cylinder

Drawings Nos 101499/ 101499A formed the basis for 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class G. Selection process A Royal Commission was convened in October 1924 led by Sir Sam Fay (General Manager of the Great Central Railway 1902-1922 and by then Chairman of BP) and by Sir Vincent Raven (ex-Chief Mechanical Engineer, North Eastern Railway 1910-1922) with the mandate to investigate NZR’s operating methods and organisation. Recommendations included the statement that ‘on the Main Trunk line and where load per axle is restricted, a suitable Garratt engine might be designed and used with great saving.’ GS Lynde (aged 37 years) was appointed from April 1925 on a 5-year contract as CME of NZR. He had been an apprentice at Gorton Foundry where he remained for some years after completing his training. He then served with the Railway Operating Division during the war, rising to the rank of Lt Col. From 1919 onwards he undertook engineering work in

engine with a tractive effort between 40,000 and 45,000 lb. He considered the quoted unit price of £12,450 (sic) as excessive and feared that requisite strengthening of wagon frames and drawgear across the fleet would take years to complete. Delay was thus inevitable before such powerful locomotives could be used to full potential. It seems that the CME was proceeding without full consideration of local conditions, and that the Prime Minister had a superior grasp of the implications. Tenders were assessed in September 1927 by RJ Harvey, a London-based Consulting Engineer. He ruled out the KitsonMeyer as having inadequate fuel and water capacities,

182

Failure in New Zealand

Class G emerging from Hutt Workshops in 1929.The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

and because the type was mostly associated with narrow gauge railways (i.e. less than 3’ 6” gauge). Against BP’s lower prices and shorter delivery times, the Modified Fairlie’s performance was ostensibly superior although the grounds for this conclusion have not survived. Also, the proposed cylinder layout and motion for the 6-cylinder Modified Fairlie is unknown; all those actually built had four cylinders. Gorton’s experience with the Garratt type was considered critical. Four- and six-cylinder power bogies were evaluated and according to Harvey, the latter’s only disadvantage was the need to keep the inside motion clean. He concluded that the 6-cylinder Garratt with Gresley conjugated valve gear and a tractive effort of 51,850 lb provided best value-formoney, supported by the incremental price for 6-cylinder chassis being only £700 per locomotive. This assessment apparently disregarded the wagon drawgear/ frame issue, and also failed to consider fully the additional maintenance requirements. All contemporary NZR classes had outside cylinders only, mostly with outside valve motion.

Lynde readily agreed with Harvey’s recommendations, stating that a locomotive with a tractive effort of 30,00035,000 lb was unsuitable as this power output was already achievable with a rigid-framed engine. Services over the central section of the Main Trunk were still in the hands of 4-8-2 Class X, then NZR’s largest type with a tractive effort of 26,620 lb and rated to haul 300-ton goods trains and 260ton passenger trains. The CME’s opinions aside, NZR’s attitude had fundamentally changed compared with the cautious approach pre-war. Tasmanian Railways Class L 2-6-2+2-6-2 (weight – 90 tons; tractive effort – 27,200 lb) had provided an empirical base from which to enter the Garratt field, and from which to develop larger examples. Over a decade later, that pragmatism had been discarded in favour of a quantum leap in size and complexity. It was strange that the Minister for Railways’ well-founded reservations were ignored when in 1927, order No. 1134 was confirmed. As Coates was also Prime Minister, he doubtless faced greater priorities than

On 22 February 1929, No. G 98 at the head of a trial train had just crossed Bridge No 1 on the 1 in 40 climb to the Wellington suburb of Khandallah on its way to Paekakariki.

183

Beyer-Garratt

A Class G standing at Paekakariki in 1930, probably on test from Hutt workshops near Wellington. At this stage all class members worked with chimney southward.

worrying about contingent risks presented by three steam engines, however high their profile. Personalities played a key role. Fay had orchestrated reorganisation of the Great Central Railways’ freight services in the early 1900s through a programme that had embraced investigation of larger locomotives (i.e. beyond the GCR’s existing 0-8-0 and 2-8-0 fleets), including a possible 0-80+0-8-0 Garratt. Work was also progressing in 1923 on a GCR 4-cylinder 2-8-0+0-8-2 that ultimately evolved as the 6-cylinder LNER Class U1 after the Grouping. The association at Gorton between ‘Tank’ (GCR’s workshops) and ‘Foundry’ was reinforced by Fay’s appointment as Chairman of BP in 1923. Both he and Raven had been successful in key UK governmental positions during the war so the pair jointly exercised enormous influence.

3 ft 6 in Gauge.’ The text stated that the locomotives were intended for working heavy mail trains to replace double heading and banking. It was added ‘Considerable attention has been given to the matter of accessibility, the tanks being raised to effect this result’ which was certainly true so far as the outside cylinders and motion were concerned. Also, the conjugating lever was enclosed within a simple curved cover in front of the tanks but access to the other end of the centre cylinder and the inside connecting rod was another matter.

The article listed equipment and fittings as follows (verbatim): MLS superheater Air sanding gear to front and rear of each group of coupled wheels One Sellar’s injector and one Davies & Metcalfe Fay’s advocacy of his own company’s product in the exhaust steam injector with top-feed clack-boxes commission’s recommendations, seems to have breached Detroit lubricators for cylinders, brake pump and expected standards of independent objectivity. Lynde, mechanical stoker evidently his protégé, focussed on the design without Wakefield mechanical lubricators for ball joints fully appreciating the operational realities. Further, Fay’s Franklin grease lubrication and special Stone’s son secured employment with NZR around this time. bronze bearings for coupled axles The assessment by the independent consulting engineer Grease lubrication and special Stone’s bronze showed little appreciation of local conditions and his bearings for connecting and coupling rods evaluation of the suitability of the centre cylinder and Pyle National electric head and cab lights motion seemed superficial. As the best local knowledge Gresley valve gear for working the inside valve source, the apparent acquiescence of NZR’s board and Steam reversing gear senior management was unfortunate. The Beyer Peacock Locomotive Stoker Company’s duplex ‘D.4’ Quarterly Review for April 1929 published an enthusiastic mechanical stoker article headed ‘NEW 4-6-2+2-6-4 SIX-CYLINDER EXPRESS Nicholson thermic syphons in firebox BEYER-GARRATT LOCOMOTIVES FOR THE NEW ZEALAND Flannery stays for firebox GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS’. The sub-heading included the Ross ‘pop’ safety valves words ‘…a remarkable Example of Advanced Design …for the Train heating apparatus 184

Failure in New Zealand -

Hendrie by-pass valves United States metallic packings.

During construction, references to intended use on mail services, and by implication express passenger trains, were supported by the driving wheel size yet mixed traffic deployment would be necessary to extract maximum economic benefit. There seems to have been no attempt to reconcile conflicting elements or re-affirm the project’s core objectives. There is a phenomenon in group management psychology where an irrational course is enacted despite unexpressed reservations on the assumption that silence implies universal acceptance. It is known as the ‘Abilene Paradox’. The three locomotives of 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class G were shipped in sections for assembly by NZR. No 98 arrived on 22 January 1929 aboard the s.s. Northumberland and Nos 99/ 100 on 1 February 1929 on the s.s. Cornwall. Assembly took place at the newly established workshops at Petone near Wellington and No. 98 commenced test runs in February 1929.

Wary of this optimism, Lynde asked an assistant to evaluate their alleged aggregate effect. Having read the report, he remarked ‘Good lord, she will be puffing pound notes out of her chimney!’ Commissioning trials The NZR and BP publicity machines heightened expectations. The initial steaming of No. 98 was acclaimed by the local press, and with good reason. Conditions on the Main Trunk’s central section restricted speeds and train loads so the Garratts gave hope for faster journeys and improved line capacity.

The design The Garratts were enormous by prevailing NZ standards: (see right). To meet the demands of the vast grate, these were the first Garratts fitted with mechanical stokers. Also, the driving wheel diameter was the largest yet seen in New Zealand, except for a pair of Baldwin 4’ 10” 4-6-0s supplied to the Wellington & Manawatu Railway (W&MR) in 1904. During construction BP regarded them as passenger locomotives as only four preceding designs had equal or larger sized driving wheels:

If comparisons were made during the design phase (for example with the competent South African Class GE), it might have been assumed that installation of a mechanical stoker would off-set any comparative deficiencies elsewhere. Also to advance steaming rates, Class G was fitted with technical gadgetry previously untried locally and presumably included through persuasive selling. The makers provided estimates about the expected performance improvements with some features: -

rocking type Franklin grease axleboxes would reputedly run for months before needing re-lubrication

Exhaust steam injector would reduce coal and water consumption by 8 to 12% Nicholson thermic siphons promised to yield a 12% reduction in coal consumption Duplex D4 mechanical stoker would sustain high firing rates The grate was of the mechanically operated 185

Beyer-Garratt

Publicity photograph following commencement of trials.

No. 98 started trials over the 25 miles between Wellington and Paekakariki on Sunday 17 February 1929 with a nominal load. An immediate constraint was the 10 mph speed restriction due to axle loading at bridge No 1 over the Wellington-Hutt road at the foot of Ngaio bank, just where the locomotive should have already been fully opened up for the climb. This section had been built by the W&MR and the locomotive then proceeded to foul station structures. Fuel pulverised by the stoker caused high spark emission that lit up tunnel interiors like daylight. On a later test, at least ten lineside fires which required attention from local fire brigades were started in the first seven miles. Nevertheless, there was jubilation over the Garratt’s abilities with successive load increases. On the fourth trial with 393 tons, a defective brake hose caused a halt between Tunnel Nos. 3 and 4. Following repair, No. 98 easily restarted on a 1 in 40 gradient with a 10-chain radius curve. A mile later, the problem recurred and again the re-start was straightforward. This feat would have been impossible with standard 4-6-2 Class Ab 4-6-2 (maximum load limit 190 tons) in circumstances where division of the train would have been unavoidable. These performances were probably misleading for the following reasons: -

At 393 tons, the load was less than 80% of the

planned maximum of 500 to 550 tons. This margin probably camouflaged the low factor of adhesion. The trial was in summer implying dry rail conditions. These circumstances were markedly different from hauling 500-plus tons up the Raurimu Spiral in sub-zero, snowbound conditions in June/ July. On 27 March 1929, No. 98 moved to Taihape depot at the southern end of the Main Trunk’s central section for operating trials between there and Te Kuiti (140 miles). The run was reported as satisfactory although ominously the centre piston valve was found to strike the steam chest covers due to overrun when drifting in full forward gear. It transpired that the brackets bearing the conjugated valve gear had worked loose. Modifications were effected and several successful runs were achieved to and from Taumarunui. Southbound loads between 400 and 530 tons were competently handled, often on greasy rails. The dynamometer car recorded 28,000 lb on the drawbar with a load of 530 tons and ascent of Owhango bank took 24 minutes against the express passenger timing of 22 minutes. Following these tests, it was decided to restrict loads to 500 tons as passing loops could not accommodate longer trains.

186

Failure in New Zealand This unique arrangement, best described as a ‘semi-union’ Garratt, was intended to facilitate the mechanical stoker but was later found unnecessary, as described in Chapter 5. The voracious appetite rendered the bunker size inadequate but the configuration and the loading gauge combined to limit the scope for capacity increase. However, room for two extra tons was squeezed in as shown by the angular inner rear profile of the bunker side which had been a regular curved arc when built. NZ coal is very friable (i.e. easily crumbled) and the stoker’s rotational action reduced it to small pieces and powdery dust. Wastage in the form of sparks and unburnt particle emission added to fuel consumption, made the type unsuitable for passenger work, and created dirty footplate conditions. Further, the unprecedented bulk of the superstructure presented a tight fit in tunnels making the atmosphere on the footplate almost intolerable. Various measures were tried, including provision of emergency oxygen supplies, but the problem was never fully solved.

New Zealand Garratt at work. NZ Railways Publicity

The tests led to modifications, mainly to the rocking grate, spark arrester, regulator and the valve gear brackets. Cabside windscreens, tool boxes, extra step and grab irons were added. No. 98 was handed to the Divisional Superintendent for the North Island on 8 May 1929. The other two locomotives then underwent similar tests and were modified in line with the prototype; No. 99 entered ordinary service on 6 June, and No. 100 on 16 August. Duties were confined to freight haulage and it is believed that a Garratt only once worked a passenger train. In service Ordinary operations exposed shortcomings. The tractive effort based on the rated maximum yielded a low factor of adhesion at 2.9 (total adhesive weight divided by tractive effort at 75%). This measure, well below the accepted British optimum of 4, implied an excessive propensity to slip which would transmit snatching forces to the weaklyconstructed rolling stock. This proved to be the case and it was noted that the effect was accentuated by both power bogies under the control of a single regulator valve. The ability to shut down the slipping unit only while leaving the other at work would have mitigated the impact. The boiler section’s superstructure carried the bunker on a frame cantilevered backward from the cab while the rear tank was separate and rode on the rear power bogie.

During construction, BP had asked the Automatic Stoker Company to liaise with Lynde/ NZR and to provide drawings of alternative styles of spark arrester to identify the optimal design. ASC preferred the “Langer” type but with nothing further heard from NZR, BP fitted its standard conical arrester which proved ineffective. NZR’s failure to respond regarding this factor and BP’s casual assumption that its standard design would suffice reflected adversely on the project control standards of both parties. Alternative forms of arrester were tried before the Langer Combustion Control System was eventually installed which was usually effective; the smokebox was extended by 16 inches to accommodate this equipment and its associated dampers. At the time, ASC’s local representatives opined that better performance might be possible with hand-firing as with larger lumps rather than neo-dust in the firebox, a thicker fire could be sustained, and consumption reduced. This was formally recommended but rejected by the NZR General Manager on grounds that crews would not accept such conditions. In 1934, Nos. 98 & 100 were fitted with the Waikato spark arrester, a local design specially developed to cope with local coal. Steaming then became erratic, as it did with conventional locomotives so fitted, but performance was improved following modification. A grate area of 50 sq ft came to be generally regarded as the threshold at which a coal-fired locomotive should be mechanically stoked. Firemen generally disliked the Duplex equipment although one man consistently produced excellent results. A cause of failure was foreign objects (old bolts, pieces of scrap metal, dog spikes etc) in the fuel which jammed the mechanism. Why the coal in conventional

187

Beyer-Garratt

Class G cab controls.

locomotives never encountered this level of contamination was never satisfactorily explained but suspicion must have rested on an element of sabotage. In this context, it was suggested that Garratt footplatemen should receive a bonus following the long-established precedent with the Fell 0-42Ts that worked the Rimutaka incline but this was officially rejected. The proposal that specially trained crews should be so rewarded had merit as this measure achieved lower running expenses with the large Class EA 2-8-2s supplied to the Kenya Uganda Railway by Robert Stephenson in 1928 (see Chapter 5).

with 4-6-2 Class Ab, NZR’s standard passenger type. BP had worked under the misapprehension that this was satisfactory whereas it had long been problematic but no one had thought to warn the manufacturer. The compression type spring hangers were difficult to keep level as the hanger nuts could loosen by up to one inch on an out-and-back journey. Corrective adjustment required lifting the power bogies which could take up to two days. As the axle loading could be subject to unpredictable variation, the Chief Engineer refused to sanction passenger use which severely restricted operational viability.

Unfortunately, another shortcoming prohibited passenger work once the spark problem had been relieved. The springing had been based on the design used for years

Another deficiency concerned difficult access to the centre cylinders and motion. With the only other multi-cylindered types (Tasmanian Railways Class M and the LNER Class

188

Failure in New Zealand proved inadequate. Some strengthening was possible but cramped conditions below the running plate, induced mainly by the rail gauge (1’ 2½” less than that under which the Gresley valve gear had been developed) prevented comprehensive modification. The driving axleboxes were lubricated by means of Franklin Grease Cellars but the grease spread and blocked the feeds intended to supply oil to the upper driving hub faces. Excessive wear resulted that allowed undue sideways movement in the axleboxes which in turn added to frame flexing on sharp curves. This resulted in the centre cylinder cranks fouling the live steam pipes that divided either side at this point (see diagram). In view of the curvaceous nature of the Main Trunk, the suitability of a design so constricted was another factor that Harvey (consulting engineer) should have addressed in his assessment of alternative designs. (The Franklin system was initially used in the successful 4-8-4 Class K which succeeded the Garratts but on being found seriously wanting, was discarded in favour of roller bearings). Cramped conditions between the frames resulted in another problem that impinged upon normal working. Originally a single water filler was installed on the front tank although another was later fitted to the rear. Tanks were filled by a single 9” pipe from the water column while the equalisation pipe could be no more than 5” in diameter due to cramped conditions between the frames. Thus time saved while on the move was eroded by delays in water replenishment.

The Taihape-Te Kuiti section of the North Island Main Trunk line.

U1), ‘hole-in-the-wall’ openings in the front and rear tank sides had been provided above the running plate. It was customary for BP to apply evolutionary improvements but absence of this feature was regressive and added substantially to maintenance times. Problems with the frame structure arose after less than two years’ service. To maximise space for the centre cylinder and motion, 15/ 16” gauge plate frames were used (compared with the NZR standard of 1¼”) while the cross-bracing

The trailer trucks caused constant difficulties. The design was a steel casting that extended almost the full width between the wheel bosses with normally positioned inside bearings. The structure was similar to that used with other NZR classes except that those had outside journals. Lubrication was a mixture of oil and grease as with the driving wheels but there was a high incidence of hot boxes, particularly with the trailer truck on the rear unit (as built) whose axle loading was 10 tons 19 cwt (compared with 9 tons 14 cwt on its leading companion). PR Angus, the CME who succeeded Lynde, complained to BP that the design was ‘obsolete and unmechanical’, and inferior to American trailer trucks. BP admitted that there been similar problems in South Africa, apparently caused by substantial super-elevation on curves that forced excessive axle deflection. BP provided drawings for an arrangement that would eliminate the problem and also offered parts at cost price for an alternative outside bearing design. A further possibility would have been for NZR Hutt workshops to install roller bearings in trucks of its own design. While the engines were confined solely to freight work and because so many other modifications were pending, no major action was taken while their longer-term future remained in question. In view of BP’s 20-odd years’ experience with Garratts, the sub-standard nature of the trailer trucks was surprising. It also raises questions over the quality of due diligence exercised by NZR in agreeing the design specification.

189

Beyer-Garratt

This view is dated 12 April 1934 allegedly after No. 98 had completed an ‘A’ class overhaul at Hutt workshops near Wellington. However, further work is necessary because the locomotive awaits re-fitting of valve motion and connecting rods. By now, the 16” extension to the smokebox and the two-ton increase in bunker capacity had been installed. This engine had been taken out of service, stored at Taihape from February 1931 and cannibalised for spare parts. From then until going into Hutt workshops in January 1934, it was officially recorded as having travelled 45 miles. NZ Railways Publicity

Drawing of Class G. Cedric Green/ EJ Mc Clare

Recognising the conflict between excessive power output and the weak structure of many freight vehicles, BP proposed installation of cylinder liners with a wall thickness of 1 1/8” to yield a 13.5% reduction in tractive effort with commensurate improvement in the factor of adhesion. It was also proposed to reduce the grate area by fitting a blanking off plate. The various proposed changes appeared logical on paper but repair and maintenance expenses were already high making the cost of extensive modifications increasingly non-viable. One duty continued to extend the Garratt’s capacity but as the economic Depression of the early 1930s hit New Zealand, the rationale for such powerful yet problematic machines diminished.

From 16 August 1929, all three were hauling goods trains six days a week over the central section of the Main Trunk and were allocated to Taihape, Taumarunui and Okahune. So far, they had worked with their smokeboxes at the southern end but in March 1930, No. 99 was turned on the triangle at Waiouru to attempt an improvement in cab working conditions in tunnels and while ascending the Raurimu Spiral. Availability started to decline with No. 98 in the workshops for modifications in March 1930, returning to work at Taihape in July. Modifications were then applied to No. 100 followed by No. 99 in November 1930. Nos. 99 & 100 had suffered excessive wear to the driving axlebox side liners. No. 100 was overhauled in January/ February 1931 at a cost of £1358 which was regarded as excessive. No. 98 was taken out of service on 3 February 1931 because of acute wear to the side liners, stored at Taihape and cannibalised for spare parts. For over half of February 1931, all three were out of service and it was apparent that NZR faced a serious problem. No. 98’s stay at Taihape was prolonged

Deployment The high profile accorded the Garratts had assumed a political dimension in July 1929 with questions in parliament about their non-use on long distance journeys and the high level of repair costs. The Minister for Health asked whether footplate crews could escape if a locomotive broke down in a tunnel. This bred a public misconception that the locomotives were too large for some tunnels. 190

Failure in New Zealand

Close-up of No. G 98 following its spell in Hutt workshops in 1934 showing the smokebox extension. The handle on the long shaft close to the chimney was operated by the fireman while taking on water. This action admitted steam to the injector that had been fitted to speed the flow through the 5’ diameter equalisation pipe. WW Stewart Collection

and over three years it travelled only 45 miles. By then loads had started to reduce so that there was insufficient work for all three. This was frustrating as modifications to Nos. 99 & 100 had proved quite effective. No. 100 fared best, covering 70,000 miles between overhauls in January 1931 and December 1933. No. 98 was eventually returned to operating condition in March 1934 after an expensive overhaul. The Garratts suffered a number of minor mishaps including an incident involving a wagon drawgear failure at Puketutu that split the train. The rear portion immediately drew to halt while the locomotive continued for at least 200 yards before starting to slow. The crew were unaware of anything amiss because the two large Westinghouse air compressors had been able to keep the brakes off despite the severed hose. As had been feared, there were numerous wagon drawgear failures on steep gradients between Taumarunui and Taihape. There was also a high incidence of failures attributed to problems with the various gadgets. During the 24 weeks to 28 February 1931, based on a six-day week the class was nominally available for 432 days. However, stoppages for

repairs accounted for 291 days, yielding a 32.6% availability factor. Poor operational reliability had a serious knock-on effect in delays to other services. By the end of 1931, the economic Depression was having a major impact on traffic levels. With increasing paucity of trains that demanded the Garratts’ abilities, substitutions using 4-8-2 Class X became frequent. By March 1935, only one Garratt was in use five days per week on trains loaded to around 60% of the rated maximum while the other two for the most part stood idle. The last to remain at work was No. 100. Each engine had cost £18,140 to purchase and place in service. The class had incurred repair and modification costs totalling £12,050 in a career lasting about six years. Total aggregate mileage was 209,000 yielding an annual average per locomotive of 12,000 miles. Prospects for economic recovery and hence sustained demand for locomotives of their power rating were remote. The prohibition on passenger work prevented their use on rosters where greater utilisation could be achieved by switching motive power between passenger, goods and mixed trains.

191

Beyer-Garratt

A late view of No. G 98 showing the additional filler that by then had been fitted to the rear tank. WW Stewart Collection

In 1932/ 3, NZR had introduced the formidable 4-8-4 Class K which was highly effective on the Main Trunk in a genuine mixed traffic role; thw average figures tabulated opposite demonstrates the Class K’s superiority. Tackling the shortcomings PR Angus on succeeding Lynde in 1930 immediately set about analysing shortcomings. Problems had stemmed from hot axleboxes, cab working conditions, mechanical stoker,

As early as July 1930, and after Lynde had departed, SH Jenkinson who was a senior engineer with NZR summarised the difficulties as outlined above and concluded: 1. 2. 3. 4.

restricted operating range, inadequate spark arresters, lubrication, weak frames, poor design of springs, and excessive axle loading on the rear unit trailer truck. Progress had been made in certain respects and RJ Gard, Chief Draughtsman had ideas about how other improvements could be made e.g. with roller bearings. He was a talented individual who had been an apprentice with the Taff Vale Railway and had then worked for WG Bagnall Ltd before joining NZR. He had designed NZR Class K 4-8-4 so his views counted. Angus recognised that despite Class G’s various problems, the Garratt concept was ideally suited to NZR’s requirements in four-cylinder, less powerful form. Others maintained that the type was unsuited to local conditions, a parochial view that took little or no account of the Garratt type’s excellent work on other continents in confronting challenges equal to or greater than those presented by the Main Trunk.

The engines would never operate satisfactorily with the Duplex mechanical stoker. Hand-fired with coal, they would never be economic working units. Experiments were needed to determine whether they could be operated satisfactorily burning crude oil. If there were negative results, they should be scrapped as they fell due for heavy repairs.

This report was remarkable for its proposal to scrap locomotives that had then seen less than 18 months’ ordinary service but was indicative of the hostility they had generated. Less dramatically, Gard’s efforts reduced the adverse impact of certain unsatisfactory factors thereby extending careers but economic circumstances mitigated against their long-term service. PR Angus identified three options consequent upon their withdrawal: Sale: Search for another 3’ 6” gauge railway interested in purchase. During the Depression this would be difficult on account of their poor reputation and considerable size. A heavily discounted price would have been necessary, before shipping costs. None of the systems in Australia could have accepted them and South Africa had by then (temporarily) forsaken the cause of articulated power. Significant modification: Re-design of the trailer trucks and modifications to bogies was estimated to cost £3,600. This assumed that no other features of these failure-prone engines would need remedial work. Thus there was a risk of throwing good money after bad.

192

Drawing that summarises main modifications applied to the Garratts. EJ Mc

Failure in New Zealand

193

Beyer-Garratt Dismantle and convert: This anticipated creation of six conventional locomotives using recoverable components, which could at least mitigate the financial loss on the project. The third option was adopted in late 1935 and NZR’s Hillside Workshops at Dunedin in the South Island, refurbished and upgraded on the recommendation of the 1924 Royal Commission, was given the task. The trio was officially withdrawn in September 1937 although the sequence of dates shows that the reconstruction exercise had started earlier. Six 4-6-2s were created using the Garratt power bogies as the base; the original boilers were adapted for stationary service and were still in use in 1966. The new Pacifics were also classified “G”, taking the numbers 95 to 100:

Over time their performance deteriorated and repair costs increased, largely due to the flimsy front end construction with resultant frame flexing that caused persistent steam leakage in numerous places. Crews’ complaints that obscured forward vision was dangerous were sympathetically received by senior management leading to early withdrawal. The Garratts had been heartily detested by maintenance staff for the unreliability and inaccessibility of the conjugated valve gear. The Pacific version fared no better in that respect. Causes Compared with experiences in other territories, the history of the New Zealand Garratt was anomalous. Planning and design was unusually muddled, compounded by reluctance to question negative elements. Undue faith was placed in the advantages of three-cylinder propulsion and inclusion of so many unproven gadgets had a net deleterious effect. The inter-related nature of the shortcomings made responsibility collegiate rather than specific but the following themes seem especially relevant: a) b)

Thus, the only case of Garratts being converted into conventional locomotives was a matter of Hobson’s Choice. A new centre cylinder was required to create enough space to install a boiler adapted from 4-6-2 Class Ab and a reasonably practicable, albeit disliked, design resulted. Budgetary constraints prevented a more thorough rebuild. Originally engaged on front line duties from Christchurch to Arthur’s Pass in the South Island, they were soon relegated to second string duties following arrival of 4-8-4 Class Kb.

c) d) e)

NZR, possibly overawed by the forceful presence of Sam Fay, carried out insufficient due diligence. Confusion over product specification and intended duties. Uncertainty over executive control of the project. Injection of complexity without effective validation. BP’s hubris driven by success with other Garratt designs.

Consequences Class G marked a watershed on a broader front. The era of exotic variety that typified the 1920s was drawing a close. Six-coupled locomotives would continue to be sold but as Gorton slowly recovered from the economic depredations of the early 1930s, the critical mass of BP’s production focussed increasingly on eight-coupled heavy freight and mixed traffic haulers. The 4-8-2+2-8-4 wheel arrangement, the most common in Gorton’s Garratt construction programme was about to come into its own.

Pacific Class G No.100, the result of a marriage between a Garratt power bogie and a modified Class Ab-type boiler. A new centre cylinder had to be installed to provide sufficient clearance for the boiler and an Ab-type tender was provided. WA Haddon

194

Pacific Class G No. 95 at Springfield in the South Island in 1953, heading a long rake of empty wagons returning to the west coast. Persistent drifting steam around the smokebox was from leakage caused by frame flexing. Also, the protective plating over the conjugating beam had by then been discarded; in the early 1980s NZ railwaymen could still recall the curious movement of this component. JA Joyce

Failure in New Zealand

195

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 10 : Inter-war eight-coupled production

The eight-coupled power bogie would become indelibly associated with the Garratt type and 2-8-0+0-8-2 Burma Railways Class GA I No. 21 (works No. 6180) of 1924 was the first example. The superstructure was typical in the angular, functional appearance of the early Garratts. The recently completed locomotive is standing in the yard at Gorton. Science Museum

lthough eight-coupled Garratts had been considered prior to the Great War, it was 1924 before the first was built. Over the next 15 years, eight-coupled variants were in the ascendant for heavy freight duties using the power bogie wheel arrangements:- 2-8-0/ 2-8-2/ 4-8-0/ 4-8-2/ 4-8-4. Operators in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and South America took delivery of eight-coupled locomotives during this period. As with six-coupled engines, evolution followed a progression of improvements helped by crossfertilisation across the product range. Up to the end of 1930, 137 eight-coupled locomotives were produced in an era of favourable trading conditions but the Depression saw severely reduced locomotive sales. Signs of gradual recovery towards the end of the 1930s were

overtaken by fundamental change in demand and supply patterns with outbreak of war in 1939. Pre-World War 2 sales (excluding those to South Africa which are covered separately in Chapter 6) are summarised opposite. Individual operators are listed in this chapter by the date on which they first acquired eight-coupled Garratts. Where an operator owned more than one type, all are reviewed in the respective operator section in the chronological order of their acquisition. For ease of reference, the first entry for each individual operator is listed in the table at the head of page 198. Burma Railways [Metre gauge] When it became the first to adopt eight-coupled Garratts,

Iranian State Railways was the last new operator to acquire eight-coupled Garratts before the war with four of these 4-8-2+2-8-4s. The background was unusual as ISR had received consultancy advice from the Great Western Railway in 1933, and Swindon was consulted later about the Garratt concept in a rare co-operation between a Big Four company and a commercial builder. They were designed to use naphtha residue (a hydrocarbon mixture akin to heavy crude oil) from Anglo Persian Oil Company refineries. In the 1940s the GWR helped by APOC pioneered oilburning locomotives using heavy Bunker C-type oil. This successful but short-lived experiment was an interesting cross-fertilisation of technology.

196

Inter-war eight-coupled production

For convenience, the locomotives built post-war as listed in the adjacent Table are included in this chapter; they closely followed pre-war design except for minor details. Locomotives supplied through the War Department are cross-referenced against their full details in Chapter 11 197

Beyer-Garratt the period with a superheated Belpaire boiler, straight-ported cylinders and plate frames. It was tested against a Mallet with results set out in the centre Table, left column this page. The success of No. 21 led to more sales from 1926/7, summarised in the bottom Table this page.

this operator already had experience of articulated motive power in the form of eight 0-6-6-0 Double Fairlies (Vulcan Foundry, 1906), followed by five 0-6-6-0 Mallets (North British). It therefore had a well-informed base from which to compare relative merits. These types had been required to work the 11-mile branch between Sedaw and Thondaung which had a ruling gradient of 1 in 25, and uncompensated 350’ radius reverse curves which equated 1 in 21.4 while over further distances the ruling gradient was 1 in 40. Both types weighed around 60 tons with a maximum 10-ton axle loading. The Fairlies were saturated with a higher tractive effort while the Mallets were superheated with a larger boiler. Their haulage capacity was about equal except that the Mallet was penalised by its 36ton tender.

Class GA II No 208 was the second and last Compound Garratt design. Like Tasmanian Class K, the high pressure cylinders were on the rear engine unit but was otherwise similar in size and weight to Class GA I. Its main significance lay in proof that compound steam produced no discernible advantage. The three variants (five locomotives) that comprised the GA series were still in service when hostilities broke out in the Far East but all were reported as out of service due to war damage in 1946. Classes GB/ GC/ GD were constructed on the orders of the War Department for military service. Their dimensional details and complex histories are described in Chapter 11 ’War Machines’. Burma, later renamed Myanmar, pursued dieselisation in the 1950s and 60s. The country became closed and secretive after World War 2 but it is understood that modernisation was fraught with problems. Reliance was apparently placed on the remaining Garratts into the 1970s and possibly later. Their disposal details are unknown although one was retained for preservation. Ten locomotives were ordered by Burma Railways after the war (Order No. 11136, works Nos. 7280-9) but with the country beset by serious internal conflict, works Nos. 7280-5 were shipped direct to East Africa. There they first became Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC 6 Nos. 1227 but shortly afterwards changed to Class 56 Nos 56016 on formation of East African Railways & Harbours. Works Nos. 7286-9 reached Burma to become Class GE Nos. 861-4 but actually did little work there before sale to the Indian North Eastern Railway (formerly the Bengal Assam Railway which had acquired nine of the War Department 4-82+2-8-4s). Information and dimensional details concerning these ten locomotives built under Order No. 11136 appear in Chapter 12 ‘Indian summer’.

With increasing traffic, 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class GA I No 21 was obtained for experimental purposes in 1924. Apart from the wheel arrangement, the locomotive was typical of 198

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Class GAII No. 208 of 1927, the second and last compound design, confirmed that no appreciable advantage was gained over simple expansion. Science Museum

Class GAIII repeated the high mounting for the leading tank, presumably to allow for possible conversion to compound steam. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Finally, there were the eight members of Class GA IV built by Krupp of Essen in 1929 which were dimensionally almost identical to Class GA III as the original patent had by then expired. At BP’s 1931 annual general meeting, Chairman Fay (who had served as Director of Movements at the War Office in the Great War) condemned BR’s purchase of Germanbuilt locomotives. He pointed out that BP was required to confirm its presence on the King’s Roll for employment of men disabled in the Great War yet British colonial operators

were free to award contracts to competitors based in the country held responsible for those unfortunate ex-soldiers. London & North Eastern Railway [Gauge 4’ 8.5”] When General Manager of the Great Central Railway, Sam Fay had expended much money and effort in improving efficiency in the vast traffic emanating from the West Yorkshire coalfields for home consumption and for export. Prior to World War 1, a Baldwin-built 2-10-2 and a home-

199

Beyer-Garratt

LNER 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class U1 No. 2395 on test in ex-works condition prior to the 1925 Shildon pageant.

designed alternative had been investigated to work 5000ton (!) coal trains to newly completed Immingham Docks. Also, specialised designs were considered as bankers for the Worsborough incline in Yorkshire. Following the war, the idea of a large freight hauler/ banker was revived as a 2-8-0+0-8-2 using the chassis of GCR Class 8K (LNER class O4) and this live project was inherited by the LNER in 1923. The Locomotive Committee in October that year considered a pair of Garratts at an aggregate cost not exceeding £20,000. BP then became involved and outline drawings were prepared in early 1924 with a formal quotation by BP of £15,395 for a single locomotive. This was approved by the Committee and the order confirmed on 8 April 1924. Nigel Gresley then became involved and stipulated 3-cylinder power bogies with conjugated valve gear and with wheelbase modified to match that of his 2-8-0 Class O2. These amendments added £500 to the cost bringing the total to almost 60% above the originally contemplated expenditure so the idea of a second locomotive was dropped. On completion, the Garratt became LNER Class U1 No 2385. Gresley’s changes apparently concerned only the cylinder configuration and chassis while the boiler retained the originally sanctioned dimensions. Amended outline drawings were prepared in August 1924 and the project proceeded without further participation by the LNER except for timing. The frames were laid down on 1 June 1925 and the locomotive was completed on the 21st. The tight schedule was imposed by the pageant that commenced at Shildon on 1 July to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Stockton & Darlington Railway’s inauguration. As host, it was a matter of prestige for the LNER to display Britain’s largest locomotive. Following delivery, it ran a trial trip Doncaster-Retford return and then appeared in the cavalcade in workshop grey. Gresley was generally averse to articulated locomotives but favoured specialised designs for particular duties. The engine, whose massive proportions came to typify eightcoupled Garratts, was deployed to Wentworth as a banker

on the Worsborough incline. This 2½ -mile section on the freight-only Barnsley avoiding line was used by coal trains from the marshalling yard at Wath-upon-Dearne to reach the Barnsley-Penistone route at West Silkstone Junction. The incline had two tunnels (74 yards and 288 yards) and the nominal ruling gradient was 1 in 40 but steeper in places due to mining subsidence. Mineral trains typically comprised

200

Inter-war eight-coupled production

The tank capacities of the LNER Class U1 was 2800 gallons on the leading power unit while its companion carried 2200 tons plus the 7-ton capacity bunker. The superstructure of both tanks was two tier with the upper section inset to allow good visibility forward and backward from the cab. Both tanks had arched bases (‘hole-in-the-wall’ fashion) to allow access to the centre cylinder and associated valve gear. This eminently sensible arrangement was notably absent from New Zealand Railways 6-cylinder Class G that emerged from Gorton three years later.

60-66 wagons weighing around 1000 tons which arrived at Wentworth double-headed by two Class O4 2-8-0s. The pilot came off and re-joined the train at the rear. The Garratt then buffered up behind, and the incline was tackled at 8-10 mph. On arrival at West Silkstone, the Garratt dropped off the moving train, reversed onto the other road and coasted back to Wentworth. This pattern remained unchanged until

early 1949 with typically eighteen return trips every 24 hours. The engine was hard to work as the grate size presented a tough proposition for hand-firing. A further problem was presented by the soft local water which had a high acidic content that prevented accumulation of protective scale and

On 4 May 1949 during its first spell on the Lickey Incline, the LNER Class U1 by now BR No. 69999 was approaching Blackwell banking a train of empty wagons. It was difficult to judge distances when buffering up to the rear of trains at Bromsgrove, especially in darkness, so the engine had been turned to work uphill in reverse. Performance was disappointing.

201

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of 2-8-0+0-8-2 LNER Class U1.

induced accelerated corrosion. In July 1926, re-tubing was necessary and the following year, the copper firebox tube plate became badly cracked. Heavy repairs in September 1928 showed the firebox roof stays to be severely wasted and the engine was out of commission until February 1929. Chemical treatment of the water supply was introduced and mileage between workshop visits doubled to 40,000. Steam brakes acted on all coupled wheels; the vacuum ejector fitted during construction was removed in 1930.

Conversion to oil-burning was carried out at BR Gorton works during August-December 1952. On completion, No. 69999 was steamed at the works and then put aside before working a trial train of 41 loaded wagons (say 650 tons) on an unrecorded date. The route from Dewsnap sidings, Manchester to Dunford Bridge on the Woodhead route was scheduled to take 61 minutes including a 10 minute water stop. The journey actually took 175 minutes including a 33-minute delay at Woodhead due to shortage of steam.

Alternative duties With the incline’s electrification in 1949, consideration was given to alternative employment. The boiler was nearing the end of its life and a replacement was authorised but suspended while two possible improvements were investigated – installation of a mechanical stoker or conversion to oil firing. Before a decision, the U1 (by then BR No 69999) was transferred in March 1949 to Bromsgrove on the London Midland Region to work as a Lickey banker. There it proved unpopular as its length made it hard to judge distances when buffering up behind trains so it was turned on a triangle to work in reverse and a headlamp was installed on the rear tank to help at night. Also, the combination of grate size, poor fuel and inexperienced firemen made maintenance of steaming levels difficult. In November 1950, it was moved into store at Mexborough although it returned to work at Wentworth for almost a year from February 1951.

Further trials in 1953 encountered recurrent steaming problems as on 11 October when at the head of 600 tons between Dewsnap and Crowden, delays at Hadfield (25 minutes) and Torside (28 minutes) were necessary for ‘blow ups’. Further modifications followed in October 1954 but by June 1955, it was clear that the engine was unsuited to mainline work but banking was apparently still thought possible as it returned to Bromsgrove. Setting off in June, this journey was completed in early August as repairs had been necessary twice en route due to hot axleboxes. The second spell on the Lickey lasted about a month. ‘Big Bertha’, 0-100 No 58100, which was the traditional Lickey banker was still at work while a Riddles Standard 2-10-0 Class 9F was on trial. Probably the latter’s demonstration of what a modern, competent design could achieve helped the decision to set the Garratt aside. It was returned to Gorton in October 1955 and stored on the 9th of that month. On 23 December it was condemned at Doncaster and broken up early in 1956.

Bengal-Nagpur Railway 2-8-0+0-8-2 No. 692. The first two Garratts supplied in 1925 were the only examples of that wheel arrangement to work on this system. Intended to replace pairs of 2-8-0s that double-headed 1600-ton trains, their cylinders and motion were standard with the 2-8-0s while the grate area was slightly more than double the size of a 2-8-0. These Garratts did all that was expected of them and in eliminating double-heading, they opened the way for more of the type. Science Museum

202

Inter-war eight-coupled production

The success of the first pair led to provision of sixteen more Garratts in 1929 in the form of Bengal Nagpur Class N. This type was the first to use the 4-8-0+0-8-4 wheel arrangement which remained unique to the BNR. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Conclusions Continuous firing was necessary even when working light engine and in tackling the Worsborough climb, boiler pressure could be down to 100 lb/ sq in at West Silkstone. Comparison with the average speeds, trailing loads, lengths of adverse gradients tackled overseas by pre-war coalfired eight-coupled Garratts graphically exposed the U1’s inadequacies. Further, its dismal performance as an oilburner was significant as British Railways had empirical data gathered through conversions led by the Great Western Railway in the 1940s. Locomotives typically worked constantly at or close to blowing off point regardless of load and how hard they were driven. Based on the criterion of aggregate cylinder volume, the U1 looked poorly proportioned compared with the larger Garratts of the 1920s. The table below summarises grate areas, total heating surfaces and aggregate cylinder volumes for eight-coupled Garratts introduced 1925-9. These figures support the contention that 50 sq ft was the maximum viable grate area for hand-fired coal burners manned by a single fireman. The Bengal Nagpur engines were hand-fired by a pair of firemen, aided by a coal trimmer; SAR Class GL was mechanically stoked. No reference has been found to suggest that during construction, any increase in boiler capacity was considered which anyway was probably prohibited by the loading

gauge; the vessel used seems to be that intended for the initial proposal based on a pair of two Class O4 chassis. In the short time scale permitted for project completion, the change to three-cylinder power bogies seems to have been effected without consideration of the resultant demands.

The cylinder volume factor resulted in the unusual situation of an under-boilered Garratt. Bengal Nagpur Railway [Gauge 5’ 6’] The BNR was one of India’s most important railways with a route mileage of 3,300 (mostly single track) of which about 65% was 5’ 6” gauge with the remainder 2’ 6”. The railway was intensively worked, serving a vast mining area with five coalfields and extensive deposits of iron ore, manganese and limestone. At least four major iron and steel manufacturers were based within its territory. There was also major freight traffic in commodities such as salt, grain, timber cotton etc, plus considerable passenger numbers including people going about their normal lives and religious pilgrims. In 1907, the BNR had purchased twenty 2-6-4Ts but there had been no subsequent dealings with BP until the order for a pair of 2-8-0+0-8-2s in 1925 for trial purposes. These engines were designed to burn low grade coal with the intention that they haul 1650-ton loads unassisted against a ruling gradient of 1 in 100. Classified HSG, they swiftly proved their competence and were initially used between Adri and Chakardharpore. As most BNR mainlines were laid with 90 lb/ yard rail, their weight at 180.55 tons presented no axle loading issues and their impact contrasted markedly with the story of the North Western Railway 2-6-2+2-6-2 (works No. 6203). The success of the first two led to orders for 16 locomotives of Class N in 1930. These were the largest to run in India and together with the later Class NM were 4-8-0+0-8-4s, the only examples of this wheel arrangement. The first sixteen formed one class but varied in valve types for comparative evaluation - see Table page 204. Frame re-design was needed to accommodate the different systems and with locomotives engaged in slow speed slogging at the head of vast loads, it must be questionable whether deviation from the Walschaerts format was worth the cost and effort. At unrecorded dates Nos. 820-5 were converted to full Walschaerts valve gear and conventional piston valves.

203

Beyer-Garratt

Class N No. 824 as experimentally built in 1930 with Caprotti valve gear. Science Museum

These engines carried 10,000 gallons of water of which 6,300 gallons were contained in the front tank for optimised weight distribution. A benefit of the typical Garratt boiler was the short length of tubes which facilitated their easy removal, aided by the usual recess in the inner face of the tank. The water capacity of Class N prevented this recess so

patented lifting screws installed beneath the inward end of the tank enabled it to be tilted forward (when empty!) to allow for tube removal. Very soon, probably before the order for Class N had been completed, ten more with the same wheel arrangement followed as Class NM. Externally they were similar to Nos. 810-9 but dimensional reductions as summarised in the table below yielded a lower maximum axle loading of 17 tons thus allowing use over the recently completed Katni

Branch. Also, they were all equipped with the Walschaerts motion/ Lentz oscillating poppet valve combination which was retained throughout their careers. The fireboxes of Nos 6713/ 4 were fitted with Nicholson Thermic Siphons. In 1939, four locomotives of 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class P were ordered and delivered the following year. These were required to work the Anuppur-Chimiri section, hauling locally mined coal. As the branch was laid with 75 lb/ yard rails and had a curvaceous alignment, their axle loading was 17 tons and because the 4-8-0 power bogie was unsuitable over this route, trailing wheels were added. They were also equipped with conventional Walschaerts valve gear, thermic siphons, arch tubes, and roller bearings on the bogie axles. These engines were a classic example of how through careful redesign, a Garratt’s increased haulage capacity could avoid recourse to expensive civil engineering. Compared with preceding Class NM, the 4-8-2+2-8-4s delivered 4.8% more by way of nominal tractive effort without increase in maximum axle loading. They thereby circumvented the need to relay 75 lb/ yd rail with the 90 lb variety on the Chimiri branch.

This reproduction of a Bengal Nagpur Class N 4-8-0+0-8-4 at work appeared in The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review for April 1931. The caption stated that the train’s load was 2000 tons.

204

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Above. The practical maximum grate size grate for conventional hand-firing was considered to be 50 sq ft; that with coal-burning Nagpur Class N 4-8-0+0-8-4 was just under 70 sq ft. The problem was solved by a four-man footplate team comprising driver, two firemen and a coal trimmer. There was plenty of room for them within the spacious cab. Science Museum. Below. Class N’s leading tank was mounted on pivoted joints at the front end. This allowed the ensemble to be tilted from the rear on patented lifting screws to facilitate tube replacement. Science Museum. Bottom. The 4-8-2+2-8-4 wheel arrangement was adopted to contain maximum axle loading and thus eliminated the need for expensive track relaying on the route over which BNR Class P No. 857 was employed. This class was the last BP type exported to India, except for the War Department Garratt’s deployed there in the mid-1940s. Beyer Peacock

205

Beyer-Garratt These were the last locomotives of any type built by BP for India except those ordered by the War Department, some of which found permanent homes in the sub-continent after the conflict. Dimensions for the four BNR classes are summerised below. The BNR fleet amply demonstrated a consistent ability to handle heavy loads. In their closing years they were engaged on iron ore traffic between Dalli Rajhara and Bilai where they hauled 2400-ton loads up 1 in 100 gradients and demonstrated the ability to run up to 45 mph on the flat. As a source of immense corporate pride, they were always maintained to high standards. The entire fleet was apparently withdrawn 1970-2 although No. 811 was reported as operational at Kharagpur workshops as late as 2006. Delhi Railway Museum is home to No. 815, an impressive sight on account of its size and unusual wheel arrangement.

Nitrate Railways (Chile) [Gauge 4’ 8.5”] (Ferrocarril de Salitrero) This railway, built for the transportation of nitrates, comprised about 400 route miles in the arid regions of northern Chile. The route climbed 3,000 feet from Iquique on the coast to Las Carpas in 19.5 miles with ruling gradients at 1 in 25 uncompensated. There were 173 curves of radii between 280’ to 350’ whose resultant resistance was estimated to equate a 1 in 21 incline. Beyond Las Carpas, there were several points in the undulating profile where heights of 3,000 feet were exceeded with the highest summit at almost 4,000 feet near Montevideo. Under these conditions, a high proportion of the power generated was expended in moving the locomotive, let alone the trailing load. Traditionally traffic had been handled by Porter 2-8-2Ts and Yorkshire Engine 4-8-4Ts which were individually capable of managing loads of 160180 tons. The Garratts had the same driving wheel diameter and cylinder dimensions but a higher boiler pressure. It was calculated that the 4-8-4Ts generated 278 lb of tractive effort per locomotive ton-weight whereas this formula indicated that the first three Garratts would produce 370 lb. However, in practice the Garratts could haul more than double the previous working maxima, a proportionate increase far greater than the tractive effort-based estimates suggested and an example of this statistic’s tenuous value as an absolute measurement of power output. Commercially, the aggregate cost for the first three engines at £45,000 was an excellent deal for the operators. They replaced seven tank locomotives, yielding a saving in traffic expenses of £60,000 in calendar 1928. Those ordered in 1925 were the largest and heaviest Garratts thus far. T Jefferson who was CME of the Nitrate Railway was closely involved in the design of what was a technically interesting type. They

206

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Bengal Nagpur Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class P – three-quarter view of the same locomotive. Beyer Peacock

Drawing of BNR 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class P.

were the first to be built by BP with bar frames, 5” thick cut from solid steel slabs, and the first oil-burners. They carried a round-topped firebox plus a Worthington-Simpson combined feed pump and feed water heater mounted on the left hand boiler frame. Fully compensated springing was fitted and driving wheel axleboxes were steel with bronze bearings and grease lubrication, as were also the big ends and connecting rods. Radial arm inboard trucks were used as opposed to the usual Cartazzi axleboxes.

An unusual feature with the first three was their ‘oversquare’ cylinders i.e. 22” diameter x 20” stroke (similar to the 4-8-4Ts). The cylinders were cast integrally with half of the frame stay and the piston valves were of 11” diameter. The slide bars were the double American pattern above the piston rod. The second batch had the more conventional cylinder proportions of 22” diameter x 26” Stroke. All six worked until 1959 when they were replaced by diesels. Dimensional summary: (right).

The 2-8-2+2-8-2s of Chilean Nitrate Railways were built to work in particularly hostile conditions and were the first built as oil burners as well as introducing other new design features. There were eventually six of the type of which the first three had the curiosity of ‘over-square’ cylinders. Beyer Peacock

207

Beyer-Garratt

Chilean Nitrate Railway

of emergency circumstances’. In the event, second-hand motive power initially acquired from the sub-continent was under-powered and inadequate for the demanding terrain over which the railway operated. The company was renamed as the Kenya Uganda Railway in February 1926 concurrent with construction of a new line that branched off the original route at Nakuru in the Rift Valley and followed a more northerly course by way of Eldoret to Tororo in Uganda and eventually reached Kampala (the capital) in 1931. The new line was perhaps the most challenging railway in Africa reaching an attitude of 9136 feet at Timboroa on the Uasin Gishu Plateau, the highest point reached by any railway in the British Empire. By the time Class EC3 was introduced, Mombasa-Nairobi was connected by 80 lb / yard rail but the mountainous route beyond used 50 lb/ yard rail. With through working to Kampala, a maximum axle loading of axle loading of 10 tons was necessary. The gradient profile on Page 210, demonstrates the arduous nature of the Mombasa-Kampala route. Increasing train weights were taxing the capacity of 4-8-0 Class EB3 (later East African Railways Class 24) which was the largest type available for service west of Nairobi and it was evident that larger motive power was urgently needed. The unsatisfactory experience with the Class MT Mallets (see Chapter 5) had discouraged further investment in articulated power but apparently influenced by performances in South Africa, it was decided to acquire Garratts. All those introduced by the Kenya Uganda Railway plus East African Railways Class EC4 (similar to EC3) were eight-coupled.

Uganda Railway/ Kenya Uganda Railway/ East African Railways [Metre gauge] This company was formed as the Uganda Railway but originally operated solely within Kenya to connect Mombasa on the Indian Ocean by way of Nairobi with Kisumu on Lake Victoria. From the latter point a ferry service operated across the lake to reach Uganda itself. Unusually for a British colonial railway, the originally proposed 3’ 6” gauge was dropped in favour of 1000 mm, apparently ‘to facilitate the procurement of rolling stock from India in case

Drawing of Chilean Nitrate Railways 2-8-2+2-8-2.

208

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Network map of East African Railways at its fullest extent.

209

Beyer-Garratt The first four were originally classified 13th but were soon re-designated EC. The concept was approached cautiously by using power bogies whose dimensions closely followed 4-8-0 Class EB3. The driving wheel spacings and diameter plus the valve motion were unchanged although the cylinder

of its independent existence, KUR introduced only two more rigid-framed types. The first was 2-6-2T Class ED1 of which 27 examples were built by Vulcan, Bagnall and Hunslet, an outmoded design with saturated steam and slide valves. The second type, 2-8-2 Class EA Nos. 1-6 built by Robert Stephenson in 1928 was the last attempt by KUR/ EAR at a large rigid-framed locomotive; its history is summarised in Chapter 5 ‘Garratt versus the rest’. Class EC having proved satisfactory, another 20 Garratts were supplied by BP in 1927/ 8 as Class EC1 Nos. 45-64. The first was delivered with a

Gradient profile for the East African Railways main line from Mombasa, Kenya to Kampala, Uganda.

diameter was reduced from 18” to 16.5”. The chassis was extended to accommodate the trailer truck resulting in the first example anywhere of 4-8-2+2-8-4 type, ultimately the most popular Garratt wheel arrangement. Class EC was fitted with the Belpaire firebox which UR had traditionally favoured and in following the Class EB3 motion layout, the cylinders were inclined with drive to the second axle. The change to drive on the third coupled axle took place with locomotives supplied from 1939 onward. Initially these engines were timber burners, consuming eucalyptus, but conditions west of Nairobi called for heavy steaming. The rate of fuel consumption necessitated wagons laden with timber behind the locomotive to provide an adequate supply, an awkward arrangement that soon led to conversion to coal. In this form, these engines proved competent on heavy mixed traffic duties leading to a major change in motive power policy. For the remainder

Weir pump and feedwater heater following similar fitting to some locomotives supplied to Tanganyika Railway but the equipment offered no appreciable benefit and was soon removed. The search for improved thermal efficiency continued with Class EC2 Nos. 65/ 6 supplied by BP in 1930. Experimental features included a wider blastpipe and chimney to reduce back pressure with three superimposed conical petticoats to sustain boiler draught. They also had arch tubes in the firebox and these changes combined to improve steaming rates compared with the earlier class members which strangely were left in original form. No. 66 was also fitted with ACFI feedwater heater but this complex device was troublesome and soon removed.

210

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Kenya Uganda Railway became a major Garratt operator and the first was 13th Class (later Class EC) No. 41 shown here. The design was approached with caution as the power bogies copied the chassis of the successful and longlived 4-8-0 Class EB3. The cylinders were slightly smaller and the addition of trailer trucks resulted in the first 4-82+2-8-4 which ultimately became the most common Garratt wheel arrangement. However the inclined cylinders with connecting rods to the second axle were an outmoded concept. No. 41 built with a Weir pump and feedwater heater which equipment was soon removed. Science Museum

As Nos. 41-44 could haul 520 tons up 1 in 50 gradients at 9 mph, classes EC1 & 2 adopted the same dimensions.

(for coal, timber undisclosed). Water capacity was always 4250 gallons. Class EC1 Nos. 45-64: As coal burners the fuel capacity was 5 tons with water 5250 gallons. When reliant on oil, alternative tanks were fitted – small (1420 gallons) or large (2375 gallons). Class EC2 Nos. 65/ 6: As coal burners, the capacities were 5 tons and 4750 gallons. When converted to oil, the capacities were 2375 gallons (oil) and 5250 gallons (water). There appears to be no record of which engines of classes EC1 and EC2 were in which form or for how long. Weight accordingly varied between the following extremes:(below). Coal imported from South Africa had been the principal fuel source following experimentation with oil in the 1920s but during World War 2 there were supply interruptions. In times of acute shortage, recourse was made to timber firing although poorly suited to the firebox. With expectations that coal supplies would remain problematic, more or less concurrent with formation of East African Railways conversion to oil firing commenced and this programme was completed about 1955. All four members of Class EC (originally 13th) and Class EC1 Nos. 51 & 53 were sold to the metre gauge Yunnan Railway in 1939. This system connected Haiphong in present day Vietnam with Kunming in Yunnan Province, south-west China. Career details in the Orient have not been traced. The rationale for this sale seems to have been to make way for the first batch of 4-8-4+4-8-4 which marked a substantial advance in performance standards (described next). Class EC3 (later EAR Class 57)

Despite sharing the same leading dimensions, there were variances in water and fuel capacities which had an impact on weights. These are best summarised by class and locomotive number. Class EC Nos. 41-4: Always burned either timber or coal and the bunker capacity was 6 tons 211

Beyer-Garratt

KUR CLASS EC1 No. 66 was delivered with ACFI feedwater heater. This yielded no worthwhile advantage and like the earlier experimental Weir pump equipment fitted to Class EC No. 41, was soon removed. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

KUR Class EC1 No. 63 as EAR Class 50 No. 5017 differed mainly from its original condition in its oil-burning equipment and in the second Westinghouse brake pump. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Even before the war brought considerable traffic increases, the original Garratts were struggling to cope with heavier trains and an annual fleet mileage that had grown from 3 million in 1934 to 4 million in 1939. KUR broke fresh ground with the six that entered service in 1939 (Nos. 77-82) and the six that followed in 1940/ 1 (Nos. 83-8). They were the first 4-8-4+4-8-4s to be built, a wheel arrangement repeated in Kenya after the war and elsewhere only by New South Wales Government Railways during the 1950s. They had bar frames (the first on KUR), round-topped fireboxes equipped with thermic syphons, self-emptying hopper ashpans, self-cleaning smokeboxes, air-operated firebox doors and cylinder drain cocks, rocking grates and chime whistles. Post-war, EAR No. 5705 (ex-KUR No. 81) was fitted for a short period with a feedwater heater.

The more advanced adjustable pivot centre was first used with this design. Adjustment was effected by a horizontal wedge which was moved by a simple screw to take up wear. These engines were fitted with roller bearings on all carrying axles, and with grease lubrication on all axle boxes and the valve gear. An application of soft grease to the valve gear lasted 2,000-3,000 miles while pads of hard grease applied to the coupled wheel axleboxes lasted for about ten times that distance. Mechanical and hydrostatic lubrication at other points eased the service obligation to about once every 1,000 miles. Another innovation was springing derived from that applied to the Sudan Railway 4-6-4+4-64s, in this case without the equalising beam between the inner bogies and the coupled springs. This was the first KUR Garratt class to have horizontal cylinders with drive to the

All four of Class EC and two members of class EC1 were sold to the metre gauge Yunnan Railway in the Far East in 1939. This transaction was connected with the 1939 acquisition of six members of 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class EC3. These were the first examples of this wheel base. Large, powerful and with a modest axle loading, these engines together the six that followed in 1940/ 1 introduced several new design features. They were crucially important in handling increased train tonnages during the war years. They were worked very hard and proved remarkably reliable.

212

Inter-war eight-coupled production

After the war changes in the loading gauge allowed a more generous profile as apparent in the revised chimney and dome of EAR Class 57 No. 5701 (previously KUR Class EC3 No 77).

third coupled axle. This reduced the vertical forces exerted on another innovation, the Laird-type crossheads which were underslung from two slidebars, a layout that became standard on KUR/ EAR. Their 4’ 6” diameter driving wheels, being larger than those on the earlier Garratts, made them better suited to long distance work at tighter schedules. The leading driving wheels on both power bogies were flangeless which effectively reduced the rigid coupled wheelbases to ten feet. The result was a locomotive with an overall wheelbase of almost 88 feet and an all-up weight that exceeded 186 tons that was able to work over routes abounding in sharp curves laid with 50 lb/ yard rail. The class was constrained by the pre-war limited loading gauge and therefore distinctive by virtue of flattened dome and squat chimney. A factor taken to account in the design stage was possible network expansion southward to connect with the South African and Rhodesian systems which raised the issue of break-of-gauge. Against that possibiity and the need to change the Kenya Uganda and Tanganyika railways to 3’ 6” gauge, Class 57 and all subsequent types built for East Africa were designed for easy conversion. Wheel rims were broad with the tyres shrunk on in the normal fashion and conversion could be achieved merely by moving the tyres outward on the rims. Also, provision was made for easy replacement of the East African ABC-type couplers with the automatic system used by SAR and RR. Gauge conversion, first considered in the mid-1920s, was never pursued due to lack of funds. They retained their original condition except for replacement of the live and exhaust steam injectors with a pair of Monito injectors after about ten years. Also, sudden changes in water level, particularly when breasting summits, could 213

Class EC3 (57)

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of KUR Class EC3, later EAR Class 57.

expose the firebox crown which necessitated the removal of the thermic syphons.

to number them from 5713 upwards before re-designation as Class 58.

On introduction, they were deployed as the principal motive power on the Mombasa-Nairobi section. Following early teething problems, they settled down to give valuable and reliable service. A report dated 16 February 1943 issued by the CME’s office, Nairobi noted that the availability factor for 1942 had been 86%. There had been 11 failures during the year and the average mileage per failure had been 61,023. Mileages between heavy repairs averaged around 200,000 with one example exceeding 240,000.

They always worked on the old KUR section and the impressive mileages achieved by Class 57 were also characteristic of these locomotives. They entered traffic

An EAR report dated about 1951 recorded the annual average mileage figures (Class 58 had arrived by mid-1949 to share the workload) and the class was subject to heavy repair every 200,000 miles. It had become unnecessary

to remove boilers from their cradles for repairs even after 400,000 miles of running. They put in over 30 years of gruelling service and were the oldest Garratts to be included in the EAR Giesl Ejector programme (see Chapter 12). Following withdrawal in the early 1970s (the author saw an example of Class 57 apparently reduced to shed pilot duties at Nairobi in 1971), their boilers were retained for rotation among Class 58 described next.

between 7 November 1949 and 5 April 1950 and an official EAR report stated the average class mileage as 6,434 for August 1950 and the cumulative class average mileage as 111,988 since introduction. With availability of ex-War Department engines and then Class 59, the 4-8-4+4-8-4s moved to the Nairobi-Nakuru-Kisumu route where they continued to give excellent service.

EAR Class 58 (EC4) This class was similar to the pre-war 4-8-4+4-8-4s and as built differed only as noted in the Table right. While most other large post-war Garratts had streamlined tanks, these locomotives retained pre-war styling which portrayed a ‘vintage’ appearance, enhanced by taller dome and chimney allowed by easing in the loading gauge. ExGorton they were provisionally numbered 89-106 in the KUR series but under the new EAR system, it was first intended

War Department locomotives Dimensional and full deployment details are provided in Chapter 11 ‘War machines’ but suffice to mention here that the KUR fleet was augmented during and immediately after

214

Inter-war eight-coupled production the war as follows: WD 4-8-2+2-8-4 Nos. 74231-43 [with gaps in sequence] as KUR Class EC5/ EAR Class 55) WD 4-8-2+4-8-2 Nos. 74418-24 (KUR Class EC4/ EAR Class 54) This series was developed from 2-8-2+2-8-2 Nos. 7440017 and were built specifically for East African service. On

formal addition to the KUR fleet, they were first designated Class EC4 Nos. 89-95 but later renumbered Nos. 100-106. On formation of EAR they became Class 54 Nos. 5401-7 in the same sequence. East African Railways & Harbours Renumbering Scheme EAR was formed in 1948 by the amalgamation of the Kenya Uganda and Tanganyika railways. The KUR classes were redesignated and re-renumbered: (below). The two surviving Tanganyika Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GA Nos 300/ 1 became EAR Class 53 Nos. 5301/ 2 – see below for further details

North British Articulated Locomotives The impact of BP-built classes EC and EC1 on KUR motive power policy echoed the enthusiasm displayed in the early 1920s by the management of South African Railways. In an attempt to retain market share, North British Locomotive Co had invented the Modified Fairlie to circumvent the original Garratt patent. With KUR, a more direct challenge came in 1931 through supply of ten Garratts. These were NBL works Nos. 24070-9, classified EC2 Nos. 67-76 by the builder and later EAR Class 52 Nos. 5201-10. They were almost identical to KUR Class EC1 except that the front tank had 100 gallons more capacity. They were built under NBL Order No. L875 (contract No. KUR W/7441/2 annotated ‘Beyer Dwgs’) without any prior reference to BP. They were never included in NBL’s promotional literature while KUR’s records merely described them as ‘North British Articulated Locomotives’. BP totally ignored their existence and referred to Gorton-built Classes EC (13th) and EC1 as KUR/ EAR Classes EC1 and EC2 respectively. NBL’s reasons appear to have been to secure income as the company had traded at a loss in the late 1920s and early 1930s, and was drawing upon its reserves to stay in business. KUR’s motivation was probably driven by price minimisation without consideration for the possible consequences. The transaction reflected buyers’ market conditions and some of the competitive risks that faced commercial manufacturers. The NBL engines lasted slightly later than BP’s Class EC1, ending their careers in 1967 on shunting and transfer work in Tanganyika (by then Tanzania). It seems probable that there was ‘discussion’ between Gorton Foundry and KUR

The leading dimensions of EAR Class 58 (EC4) were almost identical to those of preceding KUR Class 57 but benefitted from changes in the loading gauge with permitted taller boiler fittings and larger cab profile.

215

Beyer-Garratt

The left-hand side of EAR Class 58 No. 96. This engine was very soon renumbered 5808. Beyer Peacock

Class 58 No. 5811.

The final change in appearance of Classes 57/ 58 came through the installation of the Giesl Ejector as in the photograph of Class 58 No. 5810. The fitting of this equipment on a fleet-wide basis (reviewed in Chapter 12) was a local initiative without input from BP. The programme was very successful but shortened the lives of older participants, principally the hard-working 4-8-4+4-8-4s.

216

Inter-war eight-coupled production

A panoramic view of Nairobi locomotive deport with plenty of Garratts on parade including a modern 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 60 in the left foreground.

management following their introduction. Whatever was agreed, NBL built no more Garratts on its own initiative although it undertook sub-contract work for BP after World War 2 (see Chapter 12). All subsequent articulated locomotives acquired by KUR/ EAR were contracted with BP, or were built by BP for government service. Ottoman Railway [Gauge 4’ 8.5” Gauge] British-owned overseas railways were obvious sales targets as with the Ottoman Railway whose main route ran from Smyrna on the western Aegean coast of Asia Minor eastward via Aidin to Egridir. The most difficult section of route was the Azizieh Pass with gradients as steep as 1 in 36 and a 2-80+0-8-2 Garratt was ordered in 1927 specifically for banking duties at that location. This was a handsome machine but outdated with its saturated boiler which was remarkable for a 141-ton locomotive of the late 1920s. BP apparently failed to persuade the conservatively-minded operator to accept contemporary standards. It would be 1929 before it acquired its first superheated locomotive. Performance details are apparently unrecorded but it was reputed to have been unimpressive, resulting in a short career. Still in service in 1935 when OR was absorbed into the Turkish State Railway, it failed to survive long enough to be renumbered by its new owners. Following withdrawal, the locomotive minus its boiler languished in the works yard at Eskisehir until the late-1940s. The boiler might have found a secondary career on stationary duties. Leading dimensions are set out in the Table on page 219.

Benguela Railway [Gauge 3’ 6”] (Caminhos de Ferro Benguela) This railway was initiated by Robert Williams, a Scottish mining engineer, who had secured rights from the colonial authorities to extract copper from the Katanga Province of the Belgian Congo. When Rhodesia Railways quoted an exorbitant price to build a railway connection from the mining area southward to connect with its network, Williams resolved to build a fresh route eastward to the border with Angola and onward to Lobito on the Atlantic coast. Apart from avoiding the RR’s demands, the logic was to provide faster access to European and American markets. The Portuguese government granted a concession for construction of the line across Angola, on condition that work commenced at Lobito and proceeded eastward. Intended essentially as an international route to handle minerals, the railway was instrumental in the establishment of settlements along its course. Plagued with financial problems, it took 26 years to complete the 840-mile line from the coast to connect at the border with the railway network of the Belgian Congo. Following completion in 1930, there was a need for motive power to handle heavy through mineral traffic. In 1927 BP supplied six Class 10A 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts equipped with Lentz poppet valves actuated by Walschaerts valve motion with drive to the second axle plus Belpaire firebox, and plate frames. A key point of the Garratt concept was boiler efficiency and this was underlined by reliance on timber for fuel which was sourced from eucalyptus plantations adjacent to and owned by the railway. When working hard on gradients, fuel consumption could be spectacular requiring footplate teams of four to manhandle lengths of timber forward from the bunker.

217

Beyer-Garratt

In every way a pure BP design but a copy. North British Locomotive Co, apparently short of orders and facing financial difficulties, poached the BP Class EC1 design to supply to KUR Nos. 67-76 (NBL works Nos. 240709) in 1931. KUR classified them as EC2 and later they became EAR Class 52. NBL never referred to them in their promotional literature and in their Order No. L875 referred to contract No. KUR W/7441/2, annotated ‘Beyer Dwgs’. No. 72 was photographed at Mombasa. BP never acknowledged their existence. Science Museum

These 1927 engines proved successful with an ability to haul 450-ton loads up 1 in 40 gradients but there remained room for improvement. A second batch comprising 14 locomotives classified 10aII was supplied in 1929, fitted with bar frames, Walschaerts valve motion with conventional piston valves, and drive connected to the third coupled axle. This fleet of twenty proved sufficient to cover through traffic requirements during the 1930s and the Second World War. Further Garratts were required in the early 1950s and these were subject to additional improvements, details of which are set out in Chapter 12. In 1960, the need for yet more

Garratts was met by purchase of nine members of 16th Class 2-8-2+2-8-2s which by then were surplus to the needs of Rhodesian Railways. Details for Classes 10A and 10B (alternatively 10aIl and 10aII respectively) appear opposite. Mauritius Government Railway [Gauge 4’ 8.5”] This 32-mile system connected Port Louis (the capital) with Mahebourg on the far side of the island, rising to 1800 feet above sea level roughly half way at Curepipe. Laid with 80 lb/ yd rail, there were thirteen gradients that varied between 1 in 26 and 1 in 30, the most severe of which consisted of two miles at 1 in 26/ 7 on the climb out of Port Louis. Seasonal cane sugar traffic was heavy and required two or three 2-6-2T or 2-8-2Ts to a train, prior to arrival of the Garratts. The Crown Agents for the Colonies placed the order for an entirely new design on 14 December 1926. Although standardised components were probably employed, the exercise demanded a considerable effort by the Drawing Office including new pattern and template work. BP enjoyed a high degree of co-operation from Crown Agents’

Ottoman Railway company 2-8-0+0-8-2 No. 225 was delivered in 1927 for banking duties. No specific details of its performance seem to have survived but it was reputed to be lacklustre. This was attributed to its having a saturated boiler and slide valves in keeping with the conservative policies of this British-owned company. The ORC was absorbed into Turkish State Railways in 1936 and this engine did not survive long thereafter. Science Museum

218

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Otterman Railway

Benguela Railway

Mauritius Railway

219

Beyer-Garratt

Diagram for Benguela Class 10aI.

The first Garratts supplied to the Benguela Railway were the six members of Class 10A in 1927. They were one of the early forays into the 4-8-2+2-8-4 wheel arrangement but with an interesting combination of features. Drive to the second axle, plate frames and timber as fuel were certainly traditional while Walschaerts valve gear driving Lentz poppet valves was quite revolutionary. These engines were required for the heavy ore traffic originating in the Belgian Congo for through transit to the Atlantic coast of Angola. Science Museum

Drawing of Benguela Class 10B

220

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Benguela Class 10B of 1930 was significantly up-dated with bar frames, drive to the third axle and piston valves actuated by Walschaerts gear. Another improvement was the enlarged fuel cage. There were 14 of this class which together with the first six covered all through working until the early 1950s. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

inspecting engineers but nevertheless, successful project completion in 19 weeks was remarkable. The three engines were tested in steam on 6, 12 and 20 April 1927, and then delivered to Birkenhead for shipment on the 30th of that month. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review for April 1927 included a description of the exercise under the modest title ‘A Creditable Performance’. They were successful but soon after their arrival, a slow decline in traffic levels commenced. The system closed to passengers in 1956 and entirely in 1964. The Garratts were sold at auction in 1967 for scrap. Dimensions - page 219. Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway [Gauge 5’ 6”] (later part of Ferrocarril General Roca) The acquisition of 12 Garratts in 1927 by this company (of which Sir Sam Fay was a director) was unusual as they were intended for areas where routes were essentially level and free of challenging gradients. They were needed for lightlylaid routes where poor track conditions, particularly on the Toay line, prevented use of the operator’s 3-cylinder 4-8-0 Class 11C heavy freight locomotives on account of their 16ton axle loading. In that area and elsewhere, the Garratts

eliminated the need for regular double-heading and worked trains weighing up to 1700 tons. Although these loads were unprecedented, heavier tonnages would have been feasible had passing loops been longer. Elsewhere on the network, they typically worked distances of over 550 kilometres and regularly handled loads up to 2300 tons. They usually covered this distance and the return journey as part of a single roster. Five (running Nos 4858-4862) were transferred in 1931 to the affiliated Bahia Blanca North Western Railway as that system’s Nos. 482630. This appears to have been little more than a bookkeeping transaction as all 12 were deployed indiscriminately across both systems. Originally they were all oil-burners but No 4855 was converted to coal at an unknown date. These systems were nationalised in 1948 and withdrawal commenced on a progressive basis after about 25 years’ service with the last surviving until 1957. Although performance-wise they were highly effective, maintenance costs were heavy because of deployment in areas of sandy soil which resulted in accumulation of abrasive material which contaminated motion parts.

Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway No. 4862 as built.

221

Beyer-Garratt

Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway

The relatively short working careers of these handsome locomotives was largely due to a sharp fall in freight traffic. Antofagasta (Chilli) & Bolivia Railway [Metre gauge] (Ferrocarril de Antofagasta a Bolivia or ‘FCAB’) This international railway connected Antofagasta on the Chilean Pacific coast with Bolivia which meant crossing the Andes mountain range. The route commenced with a climb from the coast at 1 in 33 for 38 kilometres to reach Portozuelo. Thereafter, the climb continued with gradients as steep as 1 in 45 for another 330 kilometres to reach the Altiplano, about 13,000 feet above sea level. Even steeper gradients were encountered on branch lines. At Condor between Potosi and Rio Mulato, the railway reached 15,705 feet, the world’s highest metre gauge rail point. The railway had been built to 2’ 6” gauge which was found inadequate so its conversion to 1000 mm started in 1916 and was completed in 1928. A continuing theme in the Garratt story was the need to ward off manufacturing encroachment by competitors but with the A(B) & CR, the tables were turned. Despite BP’s efforts to promote its own product, the company was contracted in 1913 to supply six 2-6-0+0-6-2 Kitson-Meyers, essentially because this type was well-entrenched in South America while the Garratt was still a novel concept. However by 1929, BP was able to supply three 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts, specifically to work the Potosi branch. They were large oilburners, fitted with bar frames and Walschaerts valve gear. World War 2 traffic demands led to the hiring in of Garratts from Argentinian systems (the Buenos Aires Midland and Cordoba Central railways). In 1950, the A(B) & CR took delivery of six more Garratts, essentially a repeat of the 1929 engines but with the modern styling of streamlined tank and bunker. In 1959, the Bolivian section was nationalised as Ferrocarril La Paz Antofagasta which retained ownership of the Garratt fleet. The disposal details do not seem to have been recorded. Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway No. 4859 at work.

222

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Mauritius Railways 2-8-0+0-8-2 No. 60, the first of three built at short notice for the island’s standard gauge system. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

Buenos Aires & Pacific Railway [Gauge 5’ 6”] (later part of Ferrocarril General San Martin) In 1930/ 1, this railway took delivery of four 4-8-2+2-8-4s for its associated Grande Occidental Argentine Railway to be used on the branch from Villa Mercedes to Villa Dolores which was subject to an axle load restriction of 14.2 tons. They were fitted with plate frames, Walschaerts valve gear and Belpaire fireboxes. The fourth example (works No. 6715) was displayed at the British Empire Exhibition in Buenos Aires in 1931. For dimensions see page 225. This engine differed in having two Nicholson thermic syphons in the firebox and a steam-operated coal pusher in the bunker. Built as hand-fired coal burners, all were converted to oil in 1941. They were apparently confined to work on the branch for which they had been built; all were scrapped but disposal dates are not recorded.

Antofagasta (Bolivia) & Chile Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 as built in 1929, of which there were three examples.

223

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of Antofagasta (Chilli) & Bolivia Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 as built in 1929.

In 1950, the Antofagasta (Chilli) & Bolivia Railway took delivery of six more Garratts. These engines were dimensionally similar to the 1929 batch except for slight changes in the wheelbase, an increase in weight and the fitting of the modern form of streamlined tank.

224

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Antofagusta Railway (Chilli) & Bolivia Railway

Buenos Aires & Pacific Railway

Drawing of the 1950 batch of 4-8-2+2-8-4s for the Antofagasta (Chilli) & Bolivia Railway.

225

Beyer-Garratt

Buenos Aires & Pacific Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 No. 951.

The Emu Bay Railway, Tasmania 4-8-2+2-8-4s comprised three locomotives which were based on Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC1. They proved to be competent performers and quite long-lived.

Emu Bay Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 at the head of a freight train.

226

Winters Studio, Burnie

Inter-war eight-coupled production Emu Bay Railway, Tasmania [Gauge 3’ 6”] Owned by Electrolytic Zinc Company of Australasia Ltd, this railway traversed difficult country from Burnie on the north-west coast of Tasmania to Zeehan, a mining centre on the west coast of the island. The railway comprised over 88 route miles with long gradients at 1 in 40 and reverse curves with radii as sharp as 5 chains. Its main purpose was the movement of zinc, lead and copper ore which typically totalled 100,000 tons per annum, although the system also handled passenger and general freight traffic. The three Garratts which were based closely on Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC proved competent, and continued in service until dieselisation in 1963/ 4. Train loads were usually about 400 tons but on test, 496 tons was successfully started on an adverse gradient of 1 in 40. Incidentally, the EBR purchased five second-hand examples of the Australian Standard Garratt (Nos. G12/ 16/ 17/ 23/ 25) between 1948 and 1961. As noted elsewhere, these engines were vilified by administrations and footplate crews on the state government systems of Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia. In contrast, the EBR was quite successful with their small contingent. This has been largely attributed to familiarity with Garratts that derived from the 1929 acquisitions.

Córdoba Central Railway, Argentina [Metre gauge] (later part of Ferrocarril General Manuel Belgrano) The ten 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts supplied to this system in 1929 were more powerful than those of the same wheel arrangement that worked on 5’ 6” gauge Argentinian systems. They were similar to the trio supplied to Antofagasta (Chilli) & Bolivia Railway in 1928 (works Nos. 6524-6) except that these were coal burners. These locomotives were initially deployed on the main line between Alto Cordoba, Quilino and Frias where they hauled 1200-ton trains up 1 in 80 gradients, thereby eliminating the earlier practice of employing bankers. They were also used on the Los Sauces branch which had 1 in 40 gradients and sharp curvature. On assimilation into the Belgrano system, they were classified ‘E 11’. E stood for Locomotora Especial, a motive power category that embraced 10-coupled rigid, articulated and rack engines deployed on heavy duties. The Garratts were reportedly also used on the heavily graded route from Jujuy to the Bolivian border which included the Léon-Volcan rack and adhesion section. Apparently they worked in partnership with 0-8-2T Class E 20 and 0-122T Class E 24 rack locomotives. The Garratts were later numbered 1511-20 by the Cordoba (and also the Belgrano). No disposal details have been traced.

Córdoba Central Railway

Emu Bay Railway

227

Beyer-Garratt

The ten Garratts supplied to Cordoba Railways were powerful machines for the metre gauge in 1929.

Rhodesian Railways 2-8-2+2-8-2 16th Class were the result of promotional attempts by Cyril Williams to prove that this system needed eight-coupled power for freight duties.

Rhodesian Railways 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class 16A of 1952 was similar to the pre-war version except for higher boiler pressure and the streamlined profile.

Rhodesian Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] The 2-8-2+2-8-2 16th Class were the only eight-coupled Garratts in service with RR before World War 2. They were effectively an enlargement of the 2-6-2+2-6-2 14th Class but some 30 tons heavier and thus a significant step-up in size. In 1952/ 3 a further 30 in modernised form with characteristic streamlined tanks were supplied, classified 16A. They were initially deployed on heavy freight traffic between Dett and Livingstone but later moved to Umtali on the Mozambique border from where they were worked intensively to and from Salisbury. Well-regarded, they were capable of hauling 700 tons up 1 in 40 gradients. 16th Class Cyril Williams had endeavoured since the mid-1920s to interest RR in eight-coupled Garratts and MP Sells as the

newly appointed CME fully appreciated their potential as a heavy freight hauler at a time of increasing tonnages. In parallel with his investment in the 4-6-4+4-6-4 wheel arrangement for mixed traffic work, he ordered twelve more 16th Class in 1938. There was little detail change with the second batch:- top feed replaced the earlier side feed and the cowcatchers (pilots) were re-designed but nothing else of significance. This probably reflected the degree of refinement achieved by the end of the 1920s and difficult trading conditions in the following decade which reduced incentive to produce further improvements. Arrival of 1938-built locomotives was providential in view of the sharp increase in wartime traffic volumes. Local modifications included increase in bunker capacity to 11 tons in 1942/ 3, thereby eliminating the need for intermediate

228

Inter-war eight-coupled production coaling en route at Que Que and Inyazura. The front tank capacity was later increased by 140 gallons to 3340. There had been early steaming problems but re-draughting by Sells had reduced coal consumption by 10 lb per mile. Dieselisation in the 1960s rendered these useful engines surplus to requirements. Nos. 601/ 2/ 7/ 10/ 11/ 15-17/ 19 were sold in 1968 to the Benguela Railway, Angola (see this chapter); Nos. 603-6/ 9/ 12/ 14/ 18 were bought by industrial operators in South Africa between 1964 and 1972. Nos. 608 and 613 were scrapped in 1963 and 1972 respectively, and No. 600 was preserved. Class 16A By the early 1950s, heavier freight trains on the KafueBroken Hill-Ndola section were stretching the capacity 4-8-2 11th Class, the traditional motive power, and double-heading

Drawing for Rhodesian Railways 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class 16A.

A different angle view of Rhodesian Railways 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class 16A.

229

Beyer-Garratt had become the norm on trains from the Copperbelt. To cope with this traffic, the original 16th Class design was revived to the same basic dimensions but with significant modifications. In the interests of standardisation, the boiler was interchangeable with later members of 15th Class, but fitted with an all-welded steel firebox. They included the usual modern features (self-adjusting pivots, Hadfield Power Reverse Gear, grease lubricated coupled axles). The first twenty had plain bearing axle boxes on the carrying axles while the final ten used Timken roller bearings. In common with prevailing trends, streamlined front tanks and bunkers were installed, and as with other modern RR classes, the valve gear was set up to favour chimney-first running. Later eight-coupled acquisitions Two other groups of eight coupled Garratts joined the RR fleet in later years. Nine examples of the SHEG-type 2-8-2+28-2 built under the auspices of the War Department were delivered between October 1943 and June 1944. This type had been specifically designed for African service and they were classified 18th by RR. Their period on RR’s books was

short as they were sold to Moçambique Railways in 1949. Full details appear in Chapter 11. The final Garratt delivered to RR was the 51-strong fleet of Class 20th/ 20A 4-8-2+2-84s which are described in Chapter 15 ‘Indian summer’. Central Railway of Peru or Ferro Carrill Central del Peru [Gauge 4’ 8.5”] (later part of Ferrocarril Central Andino) One of the toughest railways in the world to operate, the main line commenced at the port of Callao on the Pacific coast, passed through the capital Lima and climbed into the Andes in an east-north-east direction over a distance of 138 miles to reach Oroya. There, the route turned southeasterly for 76 miles to Huancayo. At Ticlio about 90 miles from the coast, an altitude of 15,806 ft was reached which was highest for a standard gauge main line anywhere in the world. (A short branch from Ticlio reached even higher). The route made use of mountain gorges and precipitous ledges with uncompensated gradients of 1 in 22. To reach the summit, trains had to negotiate 61 tunnels, 41 bridges and 13 zig-zag reversing stations. Rock falls and earthquakes added to the operating hazards.

Introduced in 1930, the Central Railway of Peru 2-8-2+2-8-2s were similar in general appearance to the Chilean Nitrate engines. Beyer Peacock

This angle displays the massive appearance of the Central Railway of Peru engines.

230

Inter-war eight-coupled production As mentioned in Chapter 3, the Garratts used on this line appear to have been inspired by the Chilean Nitrate 2-8-2+28-2s but proved too powerful to work services economically. They were capable of handling trains longer than could be accommodated at the zig-zag reversing stations whose extension was prevented by their locations e.g. perched on ledges on the sides of steep mountains. The only solution was for the heaviest, Garratt-hauled trains to be

Central Railway of Peru

double shunted which was time-consuming. Brian Fawcett (Railways of the Andes, Plateway Press 1963) described them as large and unloved, stating that despite their haulage rating of 340 tons which allowed a single crew to handle the equivalent of two ordinary trains, they were unpopular with the traffic department. They were considered more costly to maintain than two single locomotives while burning more fuel per gross ton mile and their route availability was more restricted than the smaller engines. Regardless of these shortcomings, the railway’s management recognised the type’s potential and seriously considered purchase of more for use elsewhere on the system. These three Garratts were the last supplied for work in the Andes

and remained in service until the mid-1960s but were stored from 1966. Nigerian Government Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] Trackwork in the southern part of this system was laid with 80 lb/ yd rail but northern sections to Jebba/ Minna, Zaria and Kano used 45 lb/ yd rails. It was operating practice to work trains right through from Lagos without change of locomotive so Garratts were selected to avoid doubleheading. The system’s first essay into the type involved a pair of 4-8-2+2-8-4s with a maximum axle loading of 9.5

tons. The largest locomotives ever built to work over 45 lb rails, they were entirely conventional in construction with plate frames, Walschaerts valve gear and Belpaire boiler. However, their power proved excessive for operational needs so later purchases used the 4-6-2 power bogie. The Garratt fleet apparently survived until complete dieselisation in the 1970s. Tanganyika Railways [Metre gauge] The only Garratts purchased by this system before World War 2 were three 4-8-2+2-8-4s built by BP in 1931. They closely followed the design adopted for Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC1 except for higher, narrower front tanks

231

Beyer-Garratt

Nigerian Railways Class 201 ran counter to the normal trend by which Garratts became larger. This 4-8-2+2-8-4 design proved too large for traffic needs and further engines were smaller 4-6-2+2-6-4s of Class 501. Science Museum

A member of Nigerian Railways Class 201 at work.

Tanganyika Railways Class GA was derived from Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC1 with minor dimensional changes.

232

Inter-war eight-coupled production with lower capacity which produced a slight reduction in overall weight. Traffic levels were generally lower than in Kenya and Uganda so these three (classified GA numbered 300-2) were sufficient to cope with the heaviest trains on the main line between Dar-es-Salaam and Morogoro. They later became EAR Class 53, were exchanged with Class 60, and transferred to Kenya. Towards the end of their careers, Nos. 5301/ 2 (originally Nos. 300/ 1) returned to the Tanganyika section (No. 302 was been withdrawn in 1944 following an accident). The pair remained in service until the 1950s, latterly on transfer work at Dar-es-Salaam. Ex-War Department purchases By the end of the war, the combination of increased traffic,

repairs backlog, and manufacturers’ full order books exerted severe pressure on TR’s locomotive fleet. In 1946, four examples of BP’s ‘STALIG’ type 4-8-2+2-8-4 were purchased from the War Department as surplus to requirements in Burma. On arrival at Dar-esSalaam, they became TR Class GB Nos 750-3 (later EAR Class 55 Nos. 5503-6) and went to work on heavier duties over the Central line from Dar Es Salaam to Morogoro. Further details appear in Chapter 11 ‘War Machines’.

The facility whereby the front tank of TR Class GA could be tilted forward greatly aided tube replacement. The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review

233

Beyer-Garratt no steeper than 1 in 125, and a permitted axle loading of 13 tons. The company owned tank engines for shunting but all through traffic was worked by four Garratts. These were based on South African Railways Class GE and supplied between 1931 and 1937. They worked until dieselisation at an unknown date, believed to be in the 1960s. The system ceased full operations about 1975 although it has since worked intermittently.

Sierra Leone Development Corporation

USSR Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 No. я-01 [Gauge 1,520 mm equivalent 4 ft 11 27⁄32 in, say 5ft. 0in.] By the late 1920s, Soviet railways faced severe capacity difficulties. The network was sparse in relation to the vast land mass it served and operations were complicated by many lengthy single line routes. Recourse to doubleheaded freight trains was frequently unavoidable and a partial solution lay in larger locomotives than offered by the existing fleets of 0-10-0s (Class E), 2-8-2s (Class Shch), 0-8-0s (Class O) and 2-10-0s (Class Yc, of American origin supplied during the Great War). Five each of modern 2-10-4s (Class Ta from Alco) and 2-10-2s (Class Tb from Baldwin) were tried but disqualified through their 23-ton axle loading as the permitted maximum on many routes was 17 tons. The locally-built 4-14-4 Class AA-20-1 (known as Stalin’s engine) was soon discarded as unsuitable for what was often poorlylaid trackwork.

Sierra Leone Development Corporation [Gauge 3’ 6”] This company owned and operated a railway devoted solely to movement of iron ore mined at Marampa over a distance of 52.5 miles to the port at Pepel. Completed in 1933, the route was well engineered using 65 lb/ yd rail, with gradients

The Garratt concept having achieved international recognition, interest was expressed by Soviet Railways which approached BP in 1930 for supply of two prototypes, one for the Russian standard gauge and the other for narrow gauge. The latter order remained unconfirmed apparently due to shortage of foreign currency but supply of a single 1520 mm gauge 4-8-2+2-8-4 was agreed in May 1932, for delivery that year at a price of £23,750 FOB. This transaction was important as by then BP’s trading prospects looked bleak. The economic Depression was having disastrous effect on the heavy engineering sector globally and there were hopes that a successful prototype might lead to further business. Considerable effort was devoted to design, construction and finish of No. я-01. Probably BP’s experience with the highly successful Class GL of South African Railways three years earlier helped to ensure the effectiveness of the

Sierra Leone Development Corporation 2-8-2+2-8-2 No. 4 clearly shows its design origin in South African Railways Class GE.

234

Inter-war eight-coupled production

Soviet Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 No. я-01 was massively constructed but of essentially straightforward design.

Side view of the Russian engine.

Front power bogie of No. я-01…

235

Beyer-Garratt

…and the rear power bogie.

new giant. The locomotive was a straightforward, modern design equipped with bar frames, straight-ported cylinders and long connecting rods driving the third axle. The boiler had a round-topped firebox fed by a mechanical stoker, but with provision for hand-firing if required. The distinctive extra dome housed a water purifier. In view of the need to work in ultra-low temperatures, all steam pipes were thoroughly insulated and provided with drain cocks to prevent accumulation of condensation when not in steam. The engine units used massively-built, cross-braced 5-inch bar frames and the 40-ton boiler was supported by deep section steel plates with cross-bracing. The large cab (floor area 100 sq ft) was completely sealed against the cold, fully insulated, electrically lit, and internally lined with varnished hardwood. The roof was fitted with special ventilators and sliding cabside windows allowed ingress of fresh air. The lavish appointments included comfortable crew seating. External paintwork was black with red lining and the traditional hammer-and-sickle was applied in appropriate places. The result was handsome and well proportioned, features that disguised the locomotive’s most extraordinary feature which was its enormous size. No. Я-01 was the largest steam locomotive built in Europe and the largest Garratt ever with its chimney top standing 17’ 2” above rail level. Official weight was 259 tons although this was later revised to 262.5 tons. Overall length was 109’ and the wheelbase was 98’ 8” long yet the locomotive could safely negotiate 10-chain radius curves. Following completion and satisfactory steam testing at Gorton, it was dismantled into its major components for shipment from Birkenhead to Leningrad where it was immediately re-assembled and steamed. Traditional accounts state that the engine was tested in Russia, found wanting, and broken up around 1937 with the vague explanation that Garratts were “warm climate engines”. This reasoning hardly accorded with the type’s capacity to work in low ambient temperatures at high altitudes in the Andes. More recently published research (Robert Humm, Railway Magazine, April 2010) provides a 236

The cab interior.

Inter-war eight-coupled production

237

Beyer-Garratt

This murky snow-bound photograph was selected for the people rather than the locomotive as their presence imparts a sense of scale, thereby demonstrating the height of No. я-01 and thus its immense size.

Diagram for USSR Railways No. я-01.

Side view of the rather mysterious Iran State Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4. Four of this handsome class were acquired for use in the remote northern region of that country.

238

Inter-war eight-coupled production fuller and rather different story. The locomotive first went to Moscow for examination and then moved to the Perm Railway in the Urals for trials in February/ March 1933. En route by way of Sverdlovsk, Oofalay, and Chelyabinsk it had no difficulty in hauling 2500 tons up a 1 in 100 gradient in minus 41 degrees Celsius. Russia had developed the science of locomotive testing to far greater extent than any other country and in late May 1933, it was sent to the Institute of Traction Reconstruction for assessment. This organisation applied scientifically refined testing techniques by which a ‘locomotive passport’ was issued for each type. This document defined all aspects of performance standards under differing conditions, driving techniques, and fuel quality. The process was strictly regimented, based on theoretical assessment that largely ignored empirical evidence. Years later RA Riddles in conversation with Russian engineers was heard to remark that in his country, engines were driven by steam rather than by quadratic equations. This authoritarian regime boded ill. As the adhesive weight varied with fuel and water levels, it was not possible to issue a ‘passport’. The engine thus fell into official disfavour with the Institute’s technicians, despite its formidable performance in the real world, and so was unacceptable to the Soviet railway authorities. It is unclear how tank locomotives were assessed under this system. The theoretical technological conundrum presented by the Garratt was circumvented by its transfer to an industrial railway in eastern Siberia where it worked until at least 1957. The engine was a substantial real advance over the power outputs of existing Russian engines although the margin of increase might have resulted from miscommunication in agreeing the design specification. The Garratt’s considerable haulage capacity was limited by a profusion of wagons with weak couplings, a situation not rectified across the system until the 1950s and reminiscent of circumstances that afflicted Class G in New Zealand (see Chapter 9). This was another attempt to disqualify the type’s validity based on the variable weight factor. This basically fallacious assertion ignored the deployment of a greater share of the

total weight for adhesion than with a rigid-framed or Mallet locomotive. American interests advanced similar flimsy arguments for competitive reasons. The corollary to completion of Я-01 and its official ‘failure’ in Russia was that many BP shop floor personnel were laid off and much of the factory was placed in mothballs. Iranian State Railways [Gauge 4’ 8.5”] In 1933, Mr FC Hall, Outdoor Assistant to Mr CB Collett, Chief Mechanical Engineer of the Great Western Railway, was invited by the Iranian Government to visit the country to advise on various railway matters. Following this assignment, the Trans-Iranian Railway which was later owned by Anglo Persian Oil Co. Ltd (and ultimately became part of Iranian State Railways) placed an order for five sturdy oil-burning 2-8-0s which were delivered in 1934. By arrangement with the GWR, Mr Hall was commissioned to direct preparation of the specification, and subsequently (according to the GWR Magazine) to ‘supervise their construction’. Hall’s role was more probably that of Inspecting Engineer representing the Iranian company. A further enquiry soon followed culminating in 1936 with delivery of four 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts with Hall participating in a similar role in what proved a successful design. The same magazine was keen to share in the plaudits stating ‘the GWR may legitimately take personal pride in their performance, the success of which will have depended in no small measure upon the skill and knowledge placed at the disposal of the Iranian Government by the Company.’ (!) There was an intriguing corollary to these exchanges which is discussed in Chapter 14. Persistently difficult trading conditions had meant that this was the only fresh eight-coupled Garratt design introduced since the Russian giant. These locomotives were needed for the northern section of the Iranian State Railway’s mainline across the Elburz mountains. This route is located in the north of the country stretching from the border with present-day Azerbaijan along the western and southern coast of the Caspian Sea. The line, which reaches an altitude

Three-quarter view of the Iran State Railways Garratt.

239

Iran State Railways No. 419 (later No. 86.02 where 8 equalled the number of coupled axles and 6, that of the carrying axles) [works No. 6788] dumped at Tehran. Earlier reports noted it at this location in 1966; this photograph was dated 1972. Simon Colbeck Collection

Beyer-Garratt

240

Inter-war eight-coupled production of 7000 feet with gradients as steep as 1 in 36 over a distance of 40 miles, was heavily engineered with ten spiral loops to gain altitude and numerous tunnels, some over a mile long. Loads were up to 400 tons but the climate could be hostile, reducing the feasible maximum to 350 tons. These oil-burning locomotives had plate frames, straightported piston valves, and round-topped fireboxes. For fuel, they consumed naphtha residue from the Anglo Iranian Oil Company refineries which organisation sent two drivers to Gorton to study the engines and monitor their construction. An inspector was seconded by BP to the railway to supervise the Garratts’ introduction and to provide driver training. While dieselisation took place in the late 1950s, they were retained in reserve at least until 1966 and one was recorded as dumped in derelict condition at Tehran in 1972. The ISR which had taken over the railway before the Garratts were delivered was sufficiently impressed to place an order in 1939 for 24 large oil-burning 3-cylinder 2-10-2s of a new design. Work was suspended in 1940 on what would have been Gorton Foundry’s first 10-coupled locomotives. When revived in the early 1950s, BP was fully engaged in coping with Garratt orders so following redesign in 2-cylinder form, their construction was sub-contracted to Vulcan Foundry who delivered them in 1953. There was a further interaction between BP and Iran in unusual circumstances as described in the next chapter. In a broader commercial sense, the Iranian Garratt contract signalled that BP had weathered the extended crisis of the Depression and that improved prospects beckoned. These hopes were soon rudely dashed by the turmoil of World War 2.

241

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 11 : War machines

This collage of the company’s war-time directorate appeared in Beyer Peacock & Co Ltd and associated companies – The Second World War published May 1945.

xtract from the Minutes of the Emergency Board Meeting held 7 September 1939, at Abbey House, London SW1: …We shall place the needs of the British

Service Departments above all other considerations, financial or personal, and shall endeavour to exploit the resources of our organisation to this end…

242

War machines

The German Air Force was well aware of the importance of the Gorton complex – both Foundry and Tank. This is a reproduction of a map taken from a Luftwaffe pilot in Holland in 1945. This airman had flown over Manchester on 9 January 1941. Beyer Peacock

Locomotive construction Declaration of war saw Beyer Peacock subjected to governmental direction and control to an unprecedented degree, summed up in this extract of a letter received from the Controller-General of Munition Production ‘We must regard the locomotive as just as much a munition of war as the gun, tank, or shell’. Beyer Peacock interpreted the obligation to provide suitable war-time transportation as

ensuring ‘the right quantities of the right things at the right place at the right time.’ Demands for additional motive power required emphasis on standardised designs that could be built in large numbers by different manufacturers. BP’s expertise was deployed in locomotive design and in distribution of the requisite drawings as required. In so doing, Gorton Foundry was

243

Beyer-Garratt

Express Garratts were a rare breed and the styling of this example might seem out of place among the functionalism of the wartime fleet. The semi-streamlined Double-Pacifics ordered from Franco-Belge in 1935 by Paris á Lyons et á la Méditerranée for its standard gauge Algerian system were probably the most exotic of all Garratts. By time of delivery in 1936, Algerian State Railways had taken over the PLM network and these machines were operated at speeds up to 75 mph hauling trains weighing over 450 tons over substantial distances. Following Operation Torch which liberated Algeria from Vichy French control in 1942, additional motive power was urgently needed but by then these Garratts were in very rundown condition. Gorton was commissioned to manufacture components and spare parts to ensure their swift restoration to operational competence. This task was typical of the varied assignments that were thrust upon BP at short notice during the conflict. No. 231-132.BT.1 was the prototype of a class that numbered 29 locomotives.

responsible for more new war-time designs than all the other UK locomotive manufacturers put together. During the conflict, Gorton’s physical production covered nineteen different designs for 2’ 6”/ metre/ 3’ 6”/ 4’ 8.5”/ 5’ 3”/ 5’ 6” gauges and they were delivered for work in continental Europe, Africa, Asia, South America. The only traditional market evidently excluded from this programme was Australia.

Railway, but before they could enter service they required modification which included changes to the loading gauge, new buffing and drawgear, conversion to oil-firing and numerous minor features. Preparation of relevant drawings and manufacture of new components for an unfamiliar type of locomotive located several thousand miles distant and with no original drawings to hand must have provided an unusual organisational and technical challenge,

Among this variety were orders for construction of other manufacturers’ designs such as 50 examples of Stanier Class 8F (works Nos. 6980-7019/ 7034-43), the War Department’s standard 2-8-0 in the conflict’s early stages. Also, thirty SAR 4-8-2 Class 15F (works Nos. 7082-7111) were provided in 1944 to help with the movement of sharply increased coal tonnages mined in South Africa. An unusual task arose in 1941 following interception at sea of a German vessel carrying six 2-10-2 locomotives built by Krupp of Essen. These were commandeered for use on the Trans-Iranian

Garratt construction Production to pre-war designs continued to cope with increased demands in Brazil, Ceylon, India, Kenya, Sierra Leone, and South Africa; details are included in the class/ type histories in the relevant chapters, and are summarised on page 256. Following the Allied invasion of North Africa, BP was instructed to manufacture spare parts for express Garratts built before the war by Société Franco-Belge (under licence from BP) for further service in Algeria.

244

War machines

No. 4200 (soon renumbered 74200) was the first Garratt built for the War Department. Extreme pressures necessitated resuscitation of this obsolete 2-8-0+0-8-2 design which was based on Burma Railways Class GA III of 1927. Extra motive power was urgently required on the metre gauge network in north-eastern India and this was the only available type that could satisfy the key criterion of a 10-ton maximum axle loading. Beyer Peacock

More relevant to the core BP Garratt story was introduction of standard types for military service. Anticipating that locomotives would be needed for a wide variety of climates and territories, the War Department ruled that the design motto should be ‘the best for the most’ which acknowledged the importance of compromise. The programme which commenced in 1943 was a departure from the tradition of bespoke construction and initiated the concept of standard Garratt designs. Until then, War Department requirements had been for rigid-framed engines but conditions in difficult territory called for substantial increase in haulage capacity over metre gauge networks. The Garratt type with its proven advantages was ideal and its essential simplicity aided swift action. The pressures must have been intense during the war and were probably exacerbated by the War Department’s dictum heralding a profound change in manufacturing policy. Samuel Jackson had been a powerful presence in the company from 1900 and how he would have responded to the new imperatives thrust upon BP cannot be known as he passed away suddenly in June 1943. Governmental demand for new Garratts was intensifying alongside the unremitting need for other war-time products. James Hadfield (Jackson’s erstwhile assistant) was energetic, competent and most importantly open to fresh ideas in his new appointment as Technical Manager with authority over the Drawing Office. He was assisted by Leslie Dawes as Commercial Manager at Gorton and by Maurice Crane who had joined BP from Swindon in 1942. Formed in adversity, this team saw the company through the later stages of the conflict with notable achievements that constituted the nucleus of the post-war success story. Gorton’s facilities were fully committed, as they had been from the start of the war, when the first War Department order (works Nos. 7112-21) was received for metre gauge 2-8-0+0-8-2 Garratts. It was ordained that these engines should jump a long production queue that included other locomotives and military hardware which seemed more important. The resultant consternation among the company’s rank-and-file was compounded by reliance on an obsolete design which was the only means by which the

need could be met within an almost impossible deadline. There were sound reasons for the haste but military secrecy prevented any explanation. (More Garratts of the 2-80+0-8-2 wheel arrangement were created during 1944/ 5 by conversion of 2-6-2+2-6-2s owned by Sierra Leone Government Railway – see Chapter 8). Sixty-nine Garratts were eventually built for the War Department. Three types designated ‘Light Garratts’ (between 103 tons 7 cwt and 136 tons 16 cwt) were numbered 74200 to 74243. Two other types numbered between 74400-24 (between 151 tons 16 cwt and 171 tons 10 cwt) were ‘Heavy Garratts’. Summary details:

WD 2-8-0+0-8-2 Nos. 74200-9 (BP Works Nos. 7112-21; Order No. 11122) The last Garratts built for normal (as opposed to industrial) service without inboard trailer trucks or bogies had been the batch of 2-6-0+0-6-2s delivered in 1930 to the London Midland & Scottish Railway (works Nos. 6648-77) and 4-80+0-8-4 Class NM supplied the following year to the Bengal Nagpur Railway (works Nos. 6705-14). By 1943, the 2-8-0 power bogie was an outmoded concept and before the war, Burma Railways had been considering a 2-8-2+2-8-2 version of its Class GA series of 1924. With changing fortunes in the conflict against Japan, there was an acute motive power shortage on the metre gauge network of north-eastern India. Eight-coupled Beyer

245

Beyer-Garratt

The left-hand side of No. 4200. Beyer Peacock

Burma Railways Class GB No 827 at Pyinyaung on 16 November 1972. Basil Roberts (Simon Colbeck Collection)

Garratts with a maximum axle loading of about 10 tons were required within four months and the only feasible course was to build more of Burma Railway’s 2-8-0+0-8-2 Class GA. Despite the urgency, it was possible to modify the design with an all-welded steel inner firebox and a revised pony truck. Round-topped fireboxes were favoured for military locomotives as being quicker to build but there was no time for re-design so the original Belpaire type was used. Completed four days ahead of deadline, these engines were sent to the Bengal Assam Railway where they were helped in the preliminary stages of the 14th Army’s invasion of Burma. On arrival at Calcutta they were assembled by the Bengal Assam Railway who classified them ‘MGWL’ and used them initially in north-east India before their migration eastward later in the conflict. They hauled heavy petroleum and stone trains between Akhaura and Badarpur, a section contiguous with India’s eastern frontier and which the Japanese almost cut during

1944. Despite a ruling gradient of 1 in 150, the weights of these trains were governed only by the length of station loops and the Garratts achieved a 40% reduction in fuel consumption compared with conventional locomotives. Their main drawback was the absence of inboard trailer trucks and the small driving wheels which restricted performance on level track. The Indian standard loading gauge for metre gauge routes was maximum 11’ 9” height and 8’ 6” width which imposed limitations on boiler fittings and gave them a massive appearance. Their considerable haulage capacity was greatly valued and they were particularly useful over hill sections with 1 in 25 gradients. Major-General DJ McMullen, Director of Military Transportation in a letter to Harold Wilmot dated 23 July 1943 wrote ‘…This accomplishment [first steaming ahead of schedule], in face of all the difficulties of changing programmes and supply of materials urges me to send my heartiest congratulations…’.

246

War machines On arrival at the Bengal Assam Railway they had been numbered 701-710 in that company’s series, and were later re-designated WD (India) Nos. 410-419. Finally, they became Burma Railways Nos. 821-830. The number sequence was revised during these identity changes and records disagree concerning the identities of the first four, hence the alternatives in this table:

Two were numbered in the BAR list but later assumed WD India identities. The inboard trailer trucks contributed substantially to stability over the sharp curves of the BAR.

WD 2-8-2+2-8-2 Nos. 74210-23 (BP Works Nos. 7122-35; Order No. 11123) This series was delivered in the winter of 1943/ 4. There had been sufficient time to modernise the Burma Railways Class GA-derived design to create the 2-8-2+2-8-2 variant previously contemplated, although the Belpaire firebox was retained. Originally intended for Burma, they were re-directed to the Bengal Assam Railway where they were briefly classified ‘MGWH’. Four were reportedly named by the BAR but these were probably unofficial:

They were concentrated on the hill section between Badarpur and Lumding which included eleven miles of almost continuous 1 in 37 gradient with uncompensated curves plus long climbs at 1 in 60. The load limit for preceding 4-8-0s was 230 tons but the Garratts could manage 420 tons with fuel consumption 60% less per 1000 gross ton mile. Both these engines and the earlier 2-8-0+08-2s were mechanically reliable with a significant reduction in maintenance demands and an ability to withstand considerable punishment. Design detail was considered good and the Garratts were reputed to be the only engines with satisfactory brakes. The CME, Bengal & Assam Railway concluded some laudatory remarks as follows ‘It can truly be stated that without these engines we would have been unable to handle the inflated military traffic which passed over that section of the Railway, thereby contributing to the success of the 14th Army in Burma’.

There was more time available for design of the second batch of ‘light’ Garratts which were a distinct improvement. The inboard trailer truck greatly enhanced riding, and operating range was increased through the greater fuel and water capacities. This slightly damaged photograph depicts the prototype, No. 2411, in the yard at Gorton. The white boards behind the locomotive at either end were probably some of the screens used to blank out the background for official photography purposes. This locomotive and No. 2411 were lost at sea on transit to India. Beyer Peacock

247

Beyer-Garratt

Three-quarter front view of unlucky 2-8-2+2-8-2 War Department No. 4210. Beyer Peacock

A late survivor was 2-8-2+2-8-2 BP works No 7130, WD No. 74222, later WD India No 406 and finally Burma (later Myanmar) Railway Class GC No. 837. Dieselisation was a long drawn out affair on this system and this locomotive was photographed on this plinth in the works yard at Yangon, Insein on 19 January 1996 painted in red oxide but in a rather tatty state. By the date of this photograph (25 January 2001), it had received another coat of paint and was in more complete condition. John Tolson

The third design of light WD Garratt was known as the ‘STALIG’ type. 4-8-2+2-8-4 No. 74224 was the prototype of this series which used a round-topped firebox as being easer to manufacture. This was a landmark locomotive being the first of a successful family which in civilian guise and fitted with Belpaire fireboxes found homes on several railways. Beyer Peacock

248

War machines The first two (Nos. 74210/ 1) suffered a fate that befell other engines exported on military service. Following their initial allocation to the BAR, Nos. 74212 to 74223 were transferred to Burma in late 1945/ early 1946 where they became Burma Railways Class GC. The additional carrying axles allowed a significant increase in fuel and water capacities, without increase in axle loading. They were otherwise similar to the 2-8-0+0-8-2s. Some are known to have remained in service with Burma Railways into the 1970s. The identity changes:

genesis and the post-war types developed from it were notably cosmopolitan, even by Garratt standards. In 1929, Armstrong Whitworth had built a pair of 2-6-2+2-6-2s for the metre gauge Great Western Railway of Brazil which dimensionally closely followed South African Railways Class GC introduced in 1924. Apparently, the 1929 construction was with the concurrence of BP in contrast to AW’s supply of the pair of 4-6-0+0-6-4s to Ferrocarril Pacifico de Colombia in 1924 that had been built in breach of patent. AW withdrew from locomotive manufacture in 1937 so GWR of Brazil approached BP for supply of four 4-8-2+28-4s which were ordered in 1939 but on the outbreak of war, work was suspended on what would constitute an entirely fresh design. When more war-service light Garratts were needed, the relevant drawings were dusted off and applied in construction of 4-8-2+2-8-4s. This outstandingly successful type was code-named ‘STALIG’ (for Standard Light Garratt) during development and construction. These engines were intended for metre gauge routes in India, Burma, Malaya, Siam and Indo-China, following liberation from the Japanese. No. 74240 was completed on 7 May 1945 and named Beyer Peacock with plates mounted on the cab sides.

The second design for India’s North Eastern theatre was as important as the first, leading to a letter from RA Davis, Deputy Director General, Royal Engineer Equipment to H Wilmot which commenced ‘Now that the order for the 24 Burma-Garratts is completed, I want to send you this note to offer our warmest congratulations…’. WD 4-8-2+2-8-4 Nos. 74224-43 (BP Works Nos. 7140-59; Order Nos. 11124/ 9) The third wartime ‘Light’ design was built 1944/5. Its

Whereas the first two versions of Light Garratt had been created through adaptation of an existing design against severe time constraints, this type reflected thorough planning and a fresh approach. The 3’ 3” driving wheel diameter had suited freight haulage over hilly routes but unduly restricted speeds on level sections. Intended for a wider range of duties, the 4-8-2+2-8-4s had 4’ 0” driving wheels, increased fuel and water capacities, and were the most powerful metre gauge locomotives in the Far East. Despite these changes, it was possible to keep the axle loading down to 10 tons which permitted their use on 50 lb/ yard rail. The suspended South American design had included streamlined tanks and Belpaire firebox, neither of which were applied in the wartime version. Plate frames were used and particular care was taken to ensure efficient steam circulation. The cab was constrained by the limited Indian loading gauge but could be easily enlarged if deployed elsewhere. They were also designed for swift modification to 3’ 6” gauge in need.

The works plate No. 7156 affixed to War Department STALIG type No. 74240 which commemorated the completion of this locomotive on the day of Germany’s surrender. These plates usually only noted the year of manufacture so inclusion of the day and month was most unusual, possibly unique – but then this was a very special date. Simon Colbeck Collection

249

Beyer-Garratt

STALIG works No. 7149 emerged from Gorton Foundry as No. 74233 in the WD series and was shipped to Rangoon where it became Bengal Assam Railway No. 689, later Burma Railways No. 857 and then that company’s Class GD No. 867. As a result of internal turmoil, this engine saw little service in Burma and was sold to EAR in 1952 becoming Class 55 No. 5509.

BP order No. 11124 covered works Nos. 7140-9 and these were delivered to operators between February and May 1944. The second batch under order No. 11129 (works Nos 7150-9) was delivered in 1945. With locomotives built for military service, authoritative information on deployment and even confirmation of individual identities can be an uncertain science. The general pattern of usage for these 20 locomotives appears to be that 18 were urgently required on metre gauge routes in northeast India and Burma. Nine from Order No. 11124 were first deployed on the difficult Badarpur-Lumding section where they performed well. Perhaps more significant for post war

work was that those in Burma proved effective in mixed traffic duties. With the improving fortunes of war, nine were later declared surplus to requirements and shipped to East Africa. Four went to Tanganyika Railways (TR Nos 750-3) and were later absorbed into the fleet of East African Railways as Nos 5503-6. The other five went straight into the EAR fleet as Nos 5507-11. The last two built (WD Nos 74242/ 3) had left England direct for East Africa and were never deployed in Asia; they became Kenya Uganda Railway Nos 120/ 1 and later EAR Nos 5501/ 2. Recorded changes in operators and identities:

250

War machines

The STALIG type in its final incarnation at Nairobi shed in 1972, equipped with Giesl ejector.

The exigencies of wartime conditions provided an ideal testing ground for design optimisation and application of lower cost construction techniques. The 4-8-2+2-8-4 type in particular was an excellent base from which to develop locomotives that formed an important component of the final stage of the Garratt saga. For many locations where the type operated, key determinants were maximised haulage power and lowest feasible axle loading. WD Nos 7422443 were the foundation for successful Light Garratts in the form of Burma (later India Railways) Class GE & East African Railways Class 56/ Queensland Government Railway Nos. 1001-10,1090-1109/ Luanda Railway (Angola) Class 500/

EAR Class 60/ South Australian Railways Class 400, all of which carried Belpaire fireboxes. The six supplied to Luanda Railway were converted from metre to 3’ 6” when that system underwent gauge conversion. There was one other satisfied customer. The south American order of 1939 was reactivated in the early 1950s with four as originally planned for the Great Western Railway of Brazil and two more identical locomotives for its associated Rede Ferroviaria do Noreste (North Eastern Railway), the six to be numbered 610-5 as a group. Beyer Peacock’s production capacity was fully committed at the time and so Henschel

Diagram for 4-8-2+2-8-4 STALIG type.

251

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of 4-8-2+2-8-4 STALIG type.

was licensed to complete construction. They were delivered to the operator in 1952. WD 2-8-2+2-8-2 Nos. 74400-17 (BP Works Nos. 7057-74; Order Nos. 11125/ 6) The three preceding types were intended initially for service in India and South East Asia although two examples went directly to Easy Africa and nine later migrated there. The two ‘heavy’ designs were built for African service to haul large tonnages of raw materials extracted for the war effort. Those with 2-8-2 power bogies, were built to Cape Gauge and based on South African Railways Class GE, emphasising the seminal nature of a design which by then was almost 20 years old. They were another outstanding example of the war-time standardisation programme and were codenamed ‘SHEG’ (for Standard HEavy Garratt). Concessions to contemporary demands saw straight-ported cylinders and round-topped firebox, apparently copied from Rhodesian Railways 16th Class. Modernity yielded to the criterion of simplicity in retention of plate frames. Their deployment:

The six sent to the Gold Coast were the only Garratts used by that colony’s system whose principal routes connected the ports of Accra and Takoradi with the interior. Their main work was haulage of manganese ore and bauxite in trains loaded up to 1100 tons. They were all withdrawn in September 1960. Three were despatched direct to Chemins de Fer Congo Ocean in French West Africa where they worked freight trains weighing up to 1000 tons. They were withdrawn in November 1950 and stored until August 1954 when sold to Moçambique Railways. There they worked freight and mixed trains between Gondola and Umtali on the Beira system. The remaining nine (Order No. 11126) went new to Rhodesia Railways. They entered service between October 1943 and June 1944 as 18th Class and were used mainly on coal traffic over the heavily graded 51 miles between Wankie and Dett. From 1945 they were moved to the Vila-Machado section and were included in the transaction whereby the 200-mile line from Beira to Umtali was purchased by the newly formed Caminho de Ferro da Beira, becoming that operator’s Nos 981-9. Together with the three purchased from CFGO, they were believed to be still at work in 1980. WD 4-8-2+4-8-2 Nos. 74418-24 (BP Works Nos. 7075-81; Order No. 11127) This group was developed from Nos. 74400-17 in similar fashion to that applied with the third series of light Garratts

The ‘heavy’ 2-8-2+2-8-2 Garratt (Nos 74400-17), known as the ‘SHEG’ type, was specifically designed for African service and the only War Department type built for 3’ 6” gauge. No. 4406 (first WD number) has been labelled ‘CO’ for Chemins de Fer Congo Ocean, being the first of three shipped to that railway where it was renumbered 100.401. Beyer Peacock

252

War machines

An unidentified ‘heavy’ 2-8-2+2-8-2 at work on Gold Coast Railways. The six shipped to that colony were the only Garratts used on that system where they worked their entire careers until withdrawal en bloc in 1960. Beyer Peacock

i.e. two extra carrying axles permitted increases in fuel and water capacities without significant change in axle loading. They were built for service in East Africa and joined the fleet of the Kenya Uganda Railway as Class EC4 Nos. 8995, later renumbered KUR Nos. 100-106. On formation of East African Railways they became Class 54 Nos. 5401-7. All renumbering was in the order of construction. They were nominally classified as SHEG by BP although they embodied significant variations from the preceding batch. Experience had shown that pony trucks were unsuited to East African conditions. This was the main reason for provision of bogies but the resultant increases in water and fuel capacities were welcome. They were built with Westinghouse (as opposed to vacuum) brakes and standard

EAR couplers, and were later converted to burn oil. They were EAR’s most powerful Garratts until arrival of 4-8-2+28-4 Class 59 in 1955 and by virtue of their axle loading were restricted to the 330-mile Nairobi-Mombasa section and were mainly used on faster, heavier services for which their 3’ 9.5” driving wheel diameter was smaller than desirable. This meant that they were worked harder than prudent as a result of which, operating and maintenance personnel considered them the least satisfactory of EAR’s post-war Garratts. They were the only late generation EAR engines to be omitted from the Giesl ejector installation programme. Power output was excessive in relation to the relatively weak plate frames which had been necessary as heavy steel for bar frames was unavailable during war-time. Their repair and maintenance costs were high compared with other Garratts, as highlighted by the performance of 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class 57 during the war. Some of Class 54 were initially withdrawn about 1960 but briefly restored in 1962. Most are thought to have been taken out of service by the mid-1960s, with No 5402 the last at work. The Five War Department Types Summary of leading dimensions Notwithstanding the reservations concerning WD Nos 74418-24, in view of the circumstances surrounding design and construction, the five series of War Department Garratts were a remarkable achievement that deserves fuller recognition. They were acceptably effective in their post-war careers and the evolutionary process with the ‘light’ Garratts paid a handsome dividend through the derivative 4-8-2+2-8-4s built for civilian use.

253

Beyer-Garratt

Diagram for 3’ 6” gauge SHEG type 2-8-2+2-8-2.

WD ‘heavy’ 4-8-2+2-8-4 Nos. 74418-24 were specifically designed for service in East Africa where leading bogies were always preferred. The prototype is shown carrying its first WD number (4418) and also Kenya Uganda Railway No. 89 (Class EC4). This engine was briefly re-designated KUR No. 100 before becoming Class 54 No 5401 on formation of East African Railways. Beyer Peacock

EAR Class 54 No. 5402 in its final condition. The combination of comparatively weak frames, small driving wheels and sharply-timed schedules resulted in high maintenance expenses for this class leading to early withdrawal. These were the only post-1939 EAR Garratts to be excluded from the Giesl ejector programme.

254

War machines

Class 54 No. 5402 at Mombasa in 1 October 1967. The date indicates that this last survivor of the class was virtually at the end of its career. Simon Colbeck Collection Left. Cast iron works plate No. 7080 carried by 4-8-2+28-4 SHEG which became EAR Class 54 No. 5408. Simon Colbeck Collection

Below. Diagram for SHEG type 4-8-2+2-8-4, eventually EAR Class 54.

255

Beyer-Garratt South African Railways Class GEA The last Garratt type provided under the auspices of the Ministry of Supply were 50 examples of 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GEA for South African Railways (Order Nos. 111325). These were a separate design initiative specifically for SAR and are more appropriately reviewed in the next chapter Other wartime Garratts During the war, Gorton Foundry produced a large number of conventional steam locomotives. BP also completed orders that had been placed for other Garratts either before or during the war. Details are provided in the relative type/class histories but are summarised in the Table below.

Churchill tanks awaiting despatch from Gorton by rail. Beyer Peacock

Their value is better appreciated in the context of the only other Garratt built specifically for wartime service. The conflict in South East Asia had particular impact on 3’ 6” gauge lines in Western Australia and Queensland. In the latter state which had traditionally relied on modestly-sized motive power, locomotive mileages had increased in 1942/ 3 by 50% over pre-war levels. The solution took shape in a single type with wide route availability for use on all 3’ 6” systems. Under the auspices of the Commonwealth Land Transport Board, the 4-8-2+2-8-4 Australian Standard Garratt was designed at the Midland Junction workshops of the Western Australian Government Railway. In 1930, these works had built ten 2-6-0+0-6-2 Class Msa as developments of BP’s pioneering Classes M and Ms of 1911/ 2. Although much smaller than the motive power required in the 1940s, this experience apparently qualified WAGR to design and build the new locomotives. The CME started from scratch without reference to BP, reportedly to avoid payment of royalties although as discussed in Appendix C, the reasons might have been more complex. The exercise took three months, and over 100 companies were engaged in the manufacture of components. The result was an inefficient, ungainly machine that had a troubled history and was widely vilified. The ASG experience emphasised the value of BP’s accumulated expertise, and how well this had been exploited in Gorton’s wartime production.

Gorton’s other war work Early in the war, the War Department proposed that Gorton Foundry should build small tanks but this was declined by BP on the grounds that as their facilities were geared to manufacture of large locomotives, they would be more profitably employed in production of heavier armour. In due course, the A.22 heavy tank project, which was led by Vauxhall Motors Ltd, relied on BP to manufacture hulls and other components, and to assume responsibility for assembly, testing and final trials of what became known as the ‘Churchill’ tank. It was claimed that they were regarded by armoured units as the best weapons so far supplied to them. Work also included support of the Royal Ordnance Factories and other armament manufacturers in the production of barrels, mountings, breech mechanisms for naval guns and field artillery pieces, plus shells and bombs. BP’s subsidiary companies were employed in numerous other activities, including a co-operative arrangement with Messrs Pye Ltd in radio production.

256

War machines

Left. Cradles for 4.5” anti-aircraft guns. Beyer Peacock

Left. Annealing furnaces for bomb casings. Beyer Peacock

Breech mechanism for 12-pounder naval gun. Beyer Peacock

257

BP’s official account of its war-time achievements.

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 12 : Indian summer

The incomplete drawings for Great Western Railway of Brazil 4-8-2+2-8-4 were adapted for design of the famous STALIG type. When the order lodged pre-war was resuscitated, BP was too busy to handle the work so construction was sub-contracted to Henschel. The pre-war four ordered retained their numbers 6966-9 in the BP works list and the post-war pair were works Nos. 7136/ 7. When Henschel took over the order, they were entered as No. 25257-62 in their list and carried corresponding works plates. Having lodged the order with BP in 1939, the purchaser eventually took delivery in 1952.

he years following World War 2 saw sharp increased requirements for motive power which were met in large part by new steam construction. Building methods were straightforward, the technology was familiar, and ease of production ensured that the steam engine provided an effective low-cost solution pending arrival of more modern traction. Needs principally rested on eightcoupled types which engaged the greater effort in fresh design initiatives. BP also supplied over 100 six-coupled Garratts which were based on pre-war designs albeit with detailed and sometimes significant improvements. Although demand stemmed largely from the need to move heavy freight tonnages, a significant element of the new breed was deployed on mixed traffic work. A noticeable change in the pattern of manufacturing was greater inter-company co-operation in recognition that steam was reaching the end of its product life cycle. Rather

than invest to meet heavy but finite market demand, it made commercial sense to spread the load with other companies which had spare production capacity. Six-coupled Details of the post-war engines are included with the descriptions of the relevant earlier versions described in Chapter 8 but two deserve mention here. Ceylon Government Railways 2-6-2+2-6-2 Class C1A was the first design equipped with Hadfield Power Reverse Gear. Also, the most pronounced modernisation exercise concerned 2-6-2+2-6-2 Rhodesian Railways Class 14A of 1953, details of which accompany those of preceding 14th Class in Chapter 8. For completeness, post-war six-coupled construction is summarised in the Table below. Eight-coupled In broad terms, there were two strands to post-war eight-

258

Indian summer coupled construction. The ground-breaking South African classes GL and GM were effectively predecessors of that system’s classes GEA, GMA, GMA/M, GO; Rhodesian classes 20th/ 20A; East African Class 59; and New South Wales Government Class AD60. The other strand related continuation of successful pre-war types with sometimes only minor modifications e.g. Benguela Class 10C and EAR Class 58. The War Department ‘STALIG’ Garratt programme spawned a smaller version of 4-8-2+2-8-4 which was needed for less heavily engineered routes. This contingent provided

valuable service in Angola, East Africa, Queensland, and South Australia. Post-war, orders for eight-coupled engines comprised numerically larger batches but spread across fewer operators as summerised in the Table below. Great Western Railway of Brazil [Metre gauge] The gestation of this type was described in Chapter 11 under the section War Department Nos. 74224-43 (BP Works Nos. 7140-59) which were based on a design that had been in preparation for this railway in 1939 but shelved because of

259

Beyer-Garratt

South African Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GEA might have been envisaged as a development of pre-war 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class GE but there seemed little in common between the types. The post-war engines were ordered in three tranches but effectively formed a single transaction. The resultant 50 locomotives were numerically the largest class of BeyerGarratts in service when delivery was complete.

the War. Four locomotives had originally been ordered but two more were added for service with the GWRB’s associated company, the North Eastern Railway. The BP numbers were removed from the register on sub-contracting the order to Henschel who delivered the locomotives in 1952. They were sufficiently highly regarded for one to be retained for preservation. South African Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] Class GEA There was a need for more Garratts in South Africa during the war and 20 of this type were ordered in 1943, followed by 30 more in 1945. Demand pressures in other theatres delayed construction and deliveries only commenced in 1945. Although covered by four different orders, this was effectively a single transaction and the numerically largest placed for Garratts. They were the first South African engines with the streamlined tank profile associated with peacetime use. The classification GEA implied a development of the pre-war Class GE, presumably because the boilers were designed to be interchangeable but otherwise the types had little in common beyond being eight-coupled. They had bar frames, round-topped fireboxes, superheaters, Walschaerts valve gear, and were the only post-war Cape Gauge Garratts to be hand-fired. Like Class GM, all driving wheels were flanged but the rigid coupled wheelbase was one foot shorter than the pre-war type. Combined with a maximum axle loading (on the driving axle) of 15 tons, Class GEA had a wide sphere of availability as befitted a general purpose design. They were first used between Johannesburg and Zeerust over the route where Class GE had earlier put in such distinguished service. They also worked between Mossel Bay and Oudtshoorn, a route which climbed 2500 ft in 33 miles with long continuous gradients at 1 in 40. Single locomotives replaced double-headed Class GD Garratts over this difficult journey. They were also prominent on passenger services between Pietermaritzburg and Donnybrook/ Franklin where previously trains had been split for haulage by six-coupled Garratts. Later they were used on the Natal North Coast route and in the Cape Province.

The last of the class was withdrawn from SAR service in 1976 but several were sold into industrial service including Nos. 4003/ 24/ 25 to Dunn’s Locomotive Works, Nos. 4017/ 27 to the Enyati Railway, and Nos. 4020/ 31 to Vryheid Coronation Colliery]. Nos. 4022/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 46 have been associated with preservation projects.

260

Indian summer

A three-quarter front view of the same locomotive, Class GEA No. 4002.

Class GMA/ GMAM While BP had the capacity to complete the Class GEA order, burgeoning demand soon presented capacity problems in meeting SAR’s requirements for these classes. Pre-war Class GM formed the basic design template with resuscitation of the auxiliary tender arrangement to circumvent weight limitations. While the leading dimensions remained similar, there were numerous differences in the detail and the general appearance with the new locomotives. The manner of design and construction was unprecedented as the process apparently became a three-way debate between SAR, BP and Henschel. The last-named prepared the drawings which included all the latest BP patented innovations. The mechanical stokers and reversing gear were manufactured at Gorton but while there was close collaboration between the two manufacturers, the greater proportion of the project development appears to have been undertaken by Henschel. Although BP was the lead contractor, Henschel constructed and delivered the first 55 locomotives in 1952 & 1954.

The performance of the Henschel-built locomotives led to placement of an order with BP in December 1955 for thirtyfive more, on condition that delivery could commence within seven months. BP had experience in manufacture against seemingly impossible deadlines but post-war material shortages in a commercially competitive situation presented serious challenges. By ‘straining relationships to the utmost our friendly relationships with suppliers’ and ‘adoption of unconventional methods in the manufacture of certain essential components’, the first locomotive was steamed at Gorton one month ahead of the deadline in the presence of the SAR’s General Manager. The construction of 12 locomotives of this order was nonetheless sub-let to North British Locomotive Co to satisfy the contract deadline. There was strong competition for supply of the final thirty in what was by then a buyer’s market and recourse to NBL for assistance was again necessary to meet the purchaser’s terms. These orders are summerised in the Table overleaf. These engines took advantage of all the latest design features. They were equipped with the US-manufactured

Diagram for Class GEA.

261

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of Class GEA.

4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GMA/M; this view reflects the type’s pre-war Class GM ancestry.

View of the other side of Class GMA/M.

Drawing of Class GMA/M.

262

Indian summer

Diagram for Class GMA/M.

cast steel bed frames that were first used with New South Wales Government Railways 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD60, as described below. Franklin spring-loaded wedge horns were employed plus SKF roller bearings on all axles except for the radial trucks on the inner carrying wheels which had outside

bearings. The frame for the boiler section was of welded I-section and supported an all-welded steel firebox with a U-shaped foundation ring as first used by Oliver Bulleid on his Southern Railway pacifics. Unlike Class GM, thermic siphons were omitted although some drivers felt that the earlier locomotives were better steamers. Class GMA had the wider route availability whereas the heavier GMAM version was intended for main line routes. Change in the specification was effected by easy modification of coal and water capacities by means of moveable internal baffles. There was no external evidence of the actual classification; the differences in weights and capacities are provided at the foot of this section. Class GMAM (i.e. the mainline version) used on the East London route was fitted with steam operated chimney deflector cowls for use in tunnels but with electrification and their re-deployment elsewhere, this equipment was removed. Totalling 120 examples, Class GMA/M as the world’s most numerous Garratt type was widely distributed across the SAR network. In addition to the East London route, they worked Witbank-Germiston coal traffic, the main line through Eastern Transvaal, and also shared duties

with Class GL between Glencoe and Vryheid. They were best known for their association with Mason’s Mill depot, Pietermaritzburg which before dieselisation was home to over 100 Garratts of which 74 were of Class GMA/M (the world’s largest Garratt allocation anywhere). They were employed mainly on two branch lines (north to Greytown and south to Franklin). Both routes paralleled the coastline and encountered many valley and river crossings with numerous 1 in 30 gradients. A pair of GMA/Ms were required for a 900-ton load although shorter trains were handled by a single example, or piloted by a Class GCA or GF. A pair of GMA/Ms tackling those gradients provided an unforgettable blend of sight and unparalleled noise, as the author can personally testify. They later worked the north coast line in pairs or a single example helped by a Class GO. Others went south to Mossel Bay where they replaced Class GEA. They also moved en masse to the Cape Midland and Cape Western divisions. Between Krugersdorp and Mafeking they partnered their ancestors, Class GM. The peripatetic nature of their careers was caused by the progressive incursion of modern traction and the pattern of their replacement was constant i.e. a pair of diesel locomotives were required to do the work previously handled by a single Class GMA/M. Class GO This class was a further product of the collaboration with Henschel. Except for design and initial development work, construction was apparently left entirely in Henschel’s hands. Twenty-five were supplied in 1954 bearing Henschel works Nos. 28705-29 and SAR running Nos. 2572-96. The result was a branch line locomotive that followed closely the format of Classes GMA/ GMAM except for smaller boiler and cylinders. The cast steel chassis bed and roller bearings significantly off-set the weight saving yielded by the reduced boiler dimensions. The total weight excluding the auxiliary tender was almost one ton greater than Class GM of 1938.

263

Beyer-Garratt

4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GO was a lightweight version of GMA/M. This variant was designed by BP although Henschel which built all 25 examples and had some input in that process. By the time of this photograph, No 2592 was in store with the rest of the class at De Aar; none of the 25 worked again.

This class was largely concentrated at Lydenberg to work the Belfast-Steelport branch in Eastern Transvaal. On dieselisation of that route (again following the established formula of two diesel engines equalled one Class GO), they were used occasionally from Mason’s Mill. More regularly they worked the Empangeni-Stanger route plus the Eshowe and Nkwalini branches. Also they replaced Class GE on the north line to Gollel on the Swaziland frontier. They were

all in store at De Aar by 1975. Classes GMAM/GMA were identical except for: Burma/ Assam/ Kenya Uganda railways [Metre gauge] This was the first post-war design based on the STALIG type. Ten locomotives (BP works Nos. 7280-9) were built in 1949 for Burma Railways and intended to become that system’s Glass GE but only Nos. 7286-9 reached the Far

East where they became BR Nos 861-4. They were disembarked at Calcutta but how much work they undertook in Burma is uncertain on account of the internal upheaval then afflicting that country. They were therefore sold on to the Assam Railway becoming that system’s Nos. 984-7. The AR subsequently became part of the North Eastern Railway, then the North East Frontier Railway, and ultimately part of Indian State Railways as that system’s Nos. 32091-4. No information has been traced on their performance and duties but presumably they were concentrated in hilly areas. BP works Nos. 7280-5 were shipped from Gorton Foundry direct to East Africa where they became Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC6 Nos. 264

Indian summer

Diagram for Class GO.

122-7, and later East African Railways Class 56 Nos. 56016. Originally on the KUR section, these engines were later based at Dar-es-Salaam in Tanzania. They were well regarded and all six were equipped with Giesl ejectors in 1964. An (undated) statement issued by BP for the magazine Modern Transport:- ‘A further six of this outstanding design based on our Light Type Metre Gauge Standard have recently been completed at our Works. They are for service on the Kenya and Uganda Section where the prototype has performed so successfully, over 80,000 miles per engine having been completed without any failure whatever.’ East African Railways & Harbours [Metre gauge] EAR was formed on 1 May 1948 by the amalgamation of Kenya Uganda Railway and Tanganyika Railways. The two systems were not physically connected by rail until 1963 when the 117-mile link between Vol in Kenya and Ruvu Junction in Tanganyika was completed. This company’s Garratt fleet was augmented from 1954 with two significant classes: Additionally, EAR initiated fleet conversion to oil-burning and in 1957, a modernisation programme which embraced replacement of original chimneys with Giesl ejectors. Details of this exercise, which also included conventional locomotives, appear on pages 269-271.

265

Assam/East Africa

Beyer-Garratt

The ten locomotives of Burma Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GE were derived from the wartime STALIG type. Only four reached the Far East but it is doubtful whether they did much work for BR before transfer to India and ultimately ending up on the State Railways’ roster. The remaining six went direct to join the fleet of Kenya Uganda Railway, later becoming East African Railways Class 56.

EAR Class 56 No. 5602. This locomotive retains the distinctive form of pilot (cowcatcher) carried by Burma Railways locomotives.

Diagram for EAR Class 56.

266

Indian summer

East African Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 59 No. 5902.

Class 59 When planning for this class commenced in 1950, the busy Mombasa-Nairobi main line for which it was intended was laid with 80 lb/ yard rail and the design was prepared accordingly but the route was re-laid with 95 lb rail between then and 1955 when the first examples entered service. Traffic over this section grew enormously in the post-war period, and as neither track doubling nor electrification were viable, these engines filled the need most capably. (The track relaying programme allowed for consideration of even larger Garratts, which idea is reviewed in Chapter 14).

design of firebox and bunker allowed for easy installation of a mechanical stoker, should EAR have reverted to coal firing. Only the Russian Goliath No. я-01 was heavier but dimensional comparison is revealing: Over 20 years’ manufacturing experience stood between the two designs yet it was still extraordinary that BP’s design and engineering personnel could cram so much Class 59 vied with New South Wales Government Railways 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD60 for the largest, most powerful steam locomotive in the early 1960s. Statistical comparison: They were entirely conventional in following BP’s contemporary design practice but truly remarkable on account of their size. The CME of EAR drew up the design specification for what became the mightiest of the African Garratts, the heaviest locomotives ever built for the metre gauge and by the mid-1970s, the largest steam locomotives at work anywhere in the world. They carried round-topped fireboxes to allow a better view from the footplate as the boiler was almost to the limits of the loading gauge. All axle into so limited a volume. Extensive empirical analysis was boxes were fitted with Timken roller bearings as were also conducted in advance concerning track stresses and it was the crank pins for the connecting rod big ends. They had calculated that tapered axle loadings could safely permit a the latest BP innovations for pivot centres, reverse gear maximum of 21 tons: and tank fastenings. Against possible future modifications, they were designed for easy gauge conversion, adoption The first order (placed in 1950) had been for nine but such of vacuum braking, and alternative forms of coupling. The was the confidence in the manufacturer’s ability that it 267

Beyer-Garratt

Rear three-quarter view of Class 59 No. 5913.

No. 5913 from another angle.

Drawing of EAR Class 59.

268

Indian summer

EAR Class 60 4-8-2+2-8-4 No. 6021, another STALIG- based design.

was increased to 34 before any deliveries were completed. In service they regularly hauled 1200-ton loads up 1 in 60 gradients at a steady 14 mph whereas over the same section, the highly-regarded 4-8-4+4-8-4s of classes 57 & 58 could manage a maximum of 700 tons at 10 mph. At the time of their introduction, there was a vast backlog of traffic and cargo at Mombasa awaiting shipment up-country but within a year of arrival, this had been cleared by the efforts of Class 59 and operations had been restored to normal. Class 60 This was another derivative of STALIG 4-8-2+2-8-4 Nos. 74224-43 (Works Nos. 7140-59). As noted above, six of the type intended to become Burma Railways Class GE (works Nos. 7280-5) were instead sold to EAR becoming Nos. 56016. Because of the dimensional similarity, it was originally intended to add the locomotives described in this section to that class. At the last moment they were re-designated Class 60 which eventually comprised 29 locomotives. Despite the basic similarity with Class 56 there were slight differences in heating surfaces plus greater water and lesser fuel capacities. Their boiler mountings took advantage of the enlarged EAR loading gauge. Again, Gorton faced capacity limitations so Nos. 6001-12 were sub-let to Franco-Belge while the remaining 17 were built by BP. With the lowest

Works plate carried by No. 5913.

axle loading among the modern EAR Garratt family, they were favoured for branch line service. Nos. 6009/ 10/ 25-29 and possibly three others were sent to Tanganyika/ Tanzania and based at Dar-es-Salaam but later migrated up-country to Tabora. The remainder were scattered throughout Kenya and Uganda. They were the first Garratts to be painted in EAR’s imposing maroon livery which had originally been used by the Tanganyika Railway, and which in due course appeared on all surviving EAR steam classes. While officially 269

Beyer-Garratt

EAR Class 60 No. 6028 Sir H.H. Johnston at Eldoret. Simon Colbeck Collection

EAR Class 60, No. 6002 built by Franco-Belge.

withdrawn in the later 1970s, examples were noted at work in 1979-80 deputising for failed diesels on the Voi Branch. The Giesl Ejector Programme AE Durrant moved in 1955 from Swindon to the EAR drawing office in Nairobi and having already been in correspondence with Dr Giesl-Gieslingen of Vienna, introduced the concept of the Giesl Ejector to the CME who readily grasped the potential. This equipment comprised several small, fanshaped, diverging blast pipes surmounted by a flat, fanshaped chimney which greatly reduced back pressure and improved steaming rates. EAR routes demanded hard steaming over long distances and after successful trials between 1957 and 1959, the more modern EAR Garratts were so fitted, as summarised. 270

Indian summer

Class 60 No. 6010 on freight duties, stopped for water. Another of the Franco-Belge constructed batch, it is in later condition following the fitting of a Giesl ejector.

Performances radically improved with on average about 5% less regulator required which led to increased haulage capacity and reduced fuel and water consumption. Service times from Eldoret, Kenya to Kampala, Uganda in the hands of Giesl-equipped Class 58 were reduced from 961 to 778 minutes, mainly attributed to enhanced uphill performance. Also, stoppage times were reduced because improved consumption rates halved the number of pauses needed to take on water. Timetables had to be re-drawn to distinguish between Giesl-equipped and non-equipped motive power. Classes 57 and 58 had already endured a hard life during the war and in its immediate aftermath. They were regarded

by some as being slightly under-boilered and the greater effort extracted by use of the Giesl equipment took its toll. Increasing boiler troubles led to their withdrawal rather earlier than had been planned. A parallel can be drawn with a motor car where specialist tuning enhances performance beyond the manufacturers’ approved limits but with adverse longer term implications. Luanda Railway, Angola [Metre gauge later 3’ 6”] The order for these locomotives was placed by the Portuguese Purchasing Commission in 1947 and as early delivery was requested, the War Department Light 4-8-2+28-4 design was adopted in all main details, but with some

Diagram for EAR Class 60

271

Beyer-Garratt

Luanda Railway 4-8-2+2-8-4 No. 502.

modifications to conform with the operator’s standards. A feature which was included in the similar East African Railways Class 60 was the facility for easy change from metre to 3’ 6” gauge. This was put to good use when this railway undertook conversion of its system in what was believed to be the early 1960s (exact year cannot be traced).The other two Angolan systems were 3’ 6” gauge and while the Luanda Railway was not physically connected with either, it seems that integration of the three networks was planned although never achieved. The LR was 264 miles long from the port of Luanda to Malanje in the interior. The lower section was basically level as it crossed the coastal plain but the climb to the central African plateau involved gradients as steep as 1 in 33. Another six Garratts to a different design were supplied by Krupp in 1954. The Angolan civil war between 1975 and 2002 wrought much damage to the railway. Apparently only a couple of LR Garratts remained serviceable in 1974 and their survival for long beyond that date seems doubtful. Queensland Government Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] At almost 6,600 route miles, the QGR was the world’s second largest 3’ 6” gauge system after South African Railways. Much of it comprised lightly-laid track through remote bush areas. Substantial increases in traffic levels during the war had been the prime motivation for construction of the Australian Standard Garratt of which 23 were allocated to QGR. The unsatisfactory experiences with these engines led to their being dumped on ‘Rotten Row’ at Clapham Junction (Queensland) at the earliest opportunity. Nevertheless, they had proven the need for a powerful heavy freight hauler which could only be satisfied by a properly designed Garratt. Once again, the War Department Light 4-8-2+2-8-4 design provided the template although in this case significant 272

STALIG-type for Luanda Railway

Indian summer

Side-on view of Luanda Railway No. 502.

Luanda Railway No. 504 at work.

The STALIG variant supplied to Queensland, simply classified “Garratt”, was a successful reduction in standard size to overcome the state system’s axle loading limitations. This was similar to the case of Class GO in South Africa which was introduced to reach routes out of bounds to Class GMA/M. BP’s product was successful and well-liked on a system that had led the furore over the inadequacies of the Australian Standard Garratt.

273

Beyer-Garratt

The other side of the Queensland Garratt.

modifications were needed to conform with the system’s axle loading restrictions. These engines had roller bearings on the carrying axles, Belpaire fireboxes and arch tubes. The result proved effective and they filled an important gap in the QGR fleet at a time of major growth in agricultural produce and mineral extraction. QGR had an urgent need for 30 of these locomotives but as BP was extremely busy, construction of 20 was contracted out to Société Franco-Belge. Records suggest that they were ordered and completed in 1950 but they were actually delivered between August 1950 and March 1952. All carried plates that depicted BP works numbers but those on the 20 ‘Foreigners’ made it clear that they had been built by Franco Belge under sub-contract. An example of these plates appears in Appendix C. The details of the works and running numbers:

The first examples were based at Rockhampton in central Queensland. With further deliveries, they started to work Brisbane-Toowoomba services but were uncomfortable to work through the Victoria Tunnel in the Little Liverpool mountain range and so were transferred to BrisbaneBundaberg services. As dieselisation progressed they were moved to Moura to operate the heavy Dawson Valley coal trains. Although intended for freight duties, they also worked passenger trains and their most prestigious duty was the ‘Sunshine Express’ between Brisbane and Cairns, a distance of 1,043 miles. No. 1092 was withdrawn in 1964, 22 were condemned in 1967/ 8 and the last example in service was No. 1096 (withdrawn March 1970). No. 1009 has been preserved. 274

Indian summer

The leading power bogie.

The trailing power bogie.

Queensland Garratt No. 1009, hauling a special train along Denison Street, Rockhampton in June 1966. P. Neve

275

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of the Queensland Garratt.

Benguela Railway Class 10C was a competent, powerful design typical of the late era large Garratts and yet paradoxically was a timber burner. Some of this class were later converted to burn oil.

Drawing of Class 10C.

276

Indian summer

Benguela Railway Class 10D was dimensionally similar to the preceding class but these engines were built as oilburners.

Benguela Railway, Angola [Gauge 3’ 6”] By the late 1940s, growing traffic demanded augmentation of the twenty Garratts that had been supplied in 1926/ 9. Eighteen examples of Class 10C were supplied in 1951/ 2 and ten of Class 10D in 1955. When more Garratts were required after 1960, BP no longer had the manufacturing capacity so the gap was filled by purchase of nine 16th Class 2-8-2+2-8-2s from Rhodesian Railways. These much-needed engines shared the same cylinder and wheel dimensions as the local machines but had smaller boilers. Built as coal burners, they used the traditional timber fuel but their operational range was limited by lower bunker capacity. In later years, trains were heavily loaded with increased frequency of through workings from connected systems in Rhodesia and the Congo, and with growth in copper tonnages. Multiple working of trains became common with Garratts working in pairs or in partnership with rigid-framed locomotives. The assisting engine was usually inserted in the centre of the consist in an arrangement locally known as ‘dupla’. The post-war Garratts retained the basic dimensions of the earlier machines but were modernised with improved cylinder design, straight ports, long lap valves, SKF roller bearings on all carrying axles, streamlined tanks, and cabs widened to the limit of the loading gauge. The post-war engines were fitted with BP’s patented self-adjusting bogie pivots which proved so successful that the railway’s workshops at Nova Lisboa manufactured their own for fitting to the pre-war fleet. The locomotives of 1951/ 2 vintage were timber burners which must have been a unique case of modern, large motive power using this fuel. Some were later converted to burn oil and all the 1955 engines were built new to consume this fuel. 277

Beyer-Garratt Modifications in service included fitting most with single Kylchap exhausts while Nos. 343 and 366 had Giesl ejectors installed. That on No. 343 showed a 12.4% reduction in timber consumption compared with a Kylchap engine but despite these results, use of the Giesl ejector was not expanded. This was one of those tantalising examples in the late steam era that suggested there remained untapped potential to be released through scientific exploration of alternative combustion methods. The Benguela Railway was a well-managed, progressive operation that fulfilled an important local and international transport role. As late as 1987, the majority of the fleet consisted of steam locomotives. The system sustained considerable damage during the Angolan civil war thereby consigning its impressive locomotive fleet to an uncertain fate. New South Wales Government Railway [Gauge 4’ 8.5”) The heaviest freight services on New South Wales Government Railways were traditionally entrusted to 3-cylinder 4-8-2s of 25-strong Class D-57 introduced 1929. These locomotives used Gresley conjugated valve gear and when more were needed, Class D-58 was introduced in 1950 using rack-and-pinion inside valve motion designed by NSWGR. The later type was a notable failure with only 13 of the 25 locomotives ordered actually built and all were out of service by 1957. A major drawback to these classes was limited route availability on account of the 23-ton axle

loading which precluded use on secondary and branch line routes where freight tonnages were growing. More or less concurrent with design of the D-58s, drawings for a Mallet were prepared for more lightly-laid lines but this project was then abandoned in favour of Garratts where a large locomotive with moderate axle loading was possible. NSWGR’s investment was unusual in comprising a substantial order (60 engines) for large-sized examples of a locomotive type of which the operator had no prior experience. The equipment specification was complex and comprehensive which made Class AD-60 probably the most advanced Garratt design ever produced. They were the only 4-8-4+4-8-4s outside East Africa, the only standard gauge Garratt in Australia, and the country’s largest locomotive type. They have been incorrectly recorded as the most powerful locomotive in the Southern Hemisphere although they were definitely the heaviest. Comparative data of the six most powerful Garratts plus the two 4-8-2 rigid framed NSWGR classes is provided in the Table below. After entering service, thirty of Class AD-60 were modified to make them suitable for mainline freight duties. This work involved bunker enlargement to increase coal capacity by four tons, provision of dual controls to facilitate reverse running, and enlarged cylinders thus increasing the nominal power rating. BP’s design expertise was possibly most apparent in the ability of these massive machines to negotiate track curvature as sharp as 8 chains radius. Their

New South Government Railways 4-8-4+4-8-4 Class AD-60 as built.

278

Indian summer

The other side of Class AD-60.

sophisticated specification helps explain their weight: -

Skefco roller bearings on all axles and the main crank pins A complex system of mechanical lubrication that supplied oil to cylinders, steam chests, piston rods, valve spindles, slide bars, axlebox guides, pivot centres, reversing gear shafts, steam and exhaust ball joints, telescopic and ball joints for the mechanical stoker Grease lubrication for motion, brake and spring gear HT mechanical stoker manufactured by BP under licence Latest type of multiple valve regulator, a Melesco steam dryer and a Waugh table fire grate Superheater elements made from solid drawn steel tubes with forged return bends and ball joints The first five were equipped with five 3’ diameter arch tubes but the remainder had two thermic siphons.

The operator stipulated that the frame structure should be formed as a one-piece cast steel bed, a construction method that had never before been used in a Garratt (although it was soon followed with the South African GMAM/ GO family). Its integral nature meant that a single casting for each power unit embraced: cylinders; steam chests; axlebox guides; bottom pivot centres; draw gear; tank supports; bogie centres; brackets for reverse, spring and brake gear. The highly specialised casting and machining was undertaken by General Steel Casting Corporation of Granite City, Illinois using drawings and templates provided by BP. The immensely strong end product eliminated many bolted connections, but penalties lay in it being much heavier and more expensive to produce than either bar or plate frames constructed by traditional methods. Several problems were encountered in construction and operation of this class: 1. NSWGR was concurrently investing in modern traction and any problems that arose with the Garratts were trumpeted by the diesel lobby.

Drawing of Class AD-60.

279

Beyer-Garratt 2. 3.

The size of the original order was considered excessive so it was reduced by ten units after the first examples had entered service. Reliance on a sub-contractor on another continent for a major component (the frame bed) resulted in construction delays. This problem was exacerbated by persistent economic stringencies in the UK which made it difficult to access the US dollars needed to settle with the supplier. On entering service, numerous operational difficulties occurred which were attributed to unfamiliarity with Garratts generally and lack of experience with locomotives of this size and sophistication. However, there was nothing inherently wrong with the design and as personnel became familiar with them, they soon started to prove their worth. Encroachment by the growing diesel fleet led to a further reduction in the order and the final eight were delivered partially assembled or in component form. It appears that only one of these ‘sets’ was used when in 1969 a new No. 6042 was produced as discussed below.

common, and that care should be taken in placing too much credence on individual accounts. Intended mainly for branch line freight services, the AD-60’s ability to work over routes laid with 60 lb/ yd rail enabled their employment extensively throughout the NSWGR system and there were many accounts of their haulage feats, once initial problems had been resolved. Author Leon Oberg witnessed an incident where a double-headed dieselhauled 1200-ton freight had failed while climbing a 1 in 55 section of Wingello bank between Sydney and Goulburn on the main south line. The AD-60 working a freight in the opposite direction was commandeered to take over the failure to clear the section. There was no difficulty in starting and hauling the entire train up the incline without slipping. Including the defunct modern traction, the aggregate weight was an estimated 1,420 tons.

Concurrent with the second order, delivery was well under way with ALCO-designed A1A+A1A Class 40 diesel electric locomotives when the Australian Federal Government imposed financial constraints on new investment. To compensate, NSWGR sought cancellation or reduction of the number of AD-60s on order. Protected by a legally binding contract, BP contested this request. The final settlement:

None of the eight unassembled/ incomplete locomotives were finished by NSWGR except perhaps for the confusing case of No. 6042. Leading Garratt expert AE Durrant recorded that a replacement No. 6042 was built from parts supplied for works Nos. 7545-9 with the implication that the original was withdrawn and scrapped. However, a member of the Works Manager’s staff at NSWGR Cardiff workshops recorded that No. 6010 which had come in for removal of recoverable parts before scrapping was found to be in such good condition that it was repaired, repainted, and returned to work on 29 August 1968 with the identity of the next Garratt due in on 30 August 1968 which happened to be No. 6042. Supposedly No. 6010 was then off the books but was later reported as still at work. At this distance it is perhaps safer just to note that identity and component swapping towards the close of steam was

Despite impressive performances, the class was definitely handicapped by the deadweight factor which suggests that they were over-engineered and unnecessarily complex. The recorded ability of a pair of AD-60s to haul 1200 tons up a 1 in 40 gradient looks impressive until compared with the authenticated capacity of a single South African Class GL to haul 950 tons up a matching incline. Nevertheless, they hauled considerable loads in a variety of adverse circumstances and were active until the end of steam in the state, particularly associated with coal traffic. The first to be withdrawn was No. 6012 in 1958, followed by No. 6003 five years later after a serious accident. The pace of withdrawals increased with growth of the diesel fleet and the unmodified (smaller fuel capacity) examples were the first to go. No. 6042 (as reincarnated) was the last steam locomotive in normal government service in Australia and was withdrawn with due ceremony on 18 March 1973. The author saw three out of service on the outskirts of Sydney in October 1973. The class is well represented in preservation with at least four saved. Rhodesian Railways [Gauge 3’ 6”] Class 16A Thirty 2-8-2+2-8-2 Garratts were supplied under orders Nos. 11156/ 7 in 1952/ 3 to this faithful BP customer. As a modernised version of the 16th Class, their history appears in Chapter 10. Classes 20th/ 20A The post-war years saw considerable increase in RR traffic levels. Train miles which had totalled about 2,250,000 in 1947 grew to nearly 4,000,000 over the following seven years which meant that the system was working at close to

280

Indian summer NSW Government Railways Classes AD-60

full capacity. Doubling of single track routes was not feasible but extensive relaying with 80 lb/ yard rail enabled introduction of heavier locomotives with commensurate increase in train loads. Delivered under four orders, the 4-8-2+2-8-4s of classes 20th/20A were the heaviest supplied to RR and the last of that select band of large post-war designs that became synonymous with the twilight of the Beyer-Garratt era. They embodied all the modern Garratt design features and were the only engines on the system fitted with mechanical stokers. They were rated as at least 25% more powerful than any other RR locomotive and an interesting point was provision in the cylinder design for a connection whereby exhaust steam could be directed to a condenser mounted on a trailing vehicle. This idea was drawn from South African Railways 4-8-4 Class 25, ninety of which were built with Henschel’s design of enormous condensing tender to minimise water consumption in arid country. The idea was never used but it showed that BP was happy to exploit the ideas of others. As a manufacturing collaborator, Henschel was a natural source of creative concepts for BP. The two classes suffered from fractures to their plate frames and also firebox failures. It has been asserted that the former would have been avoided had bar frames been used, or even cast steel frame beds as with SAR Class GMA/M. Causes of the firebox problems were harder to diagnose as the design was almost identical to that used on some SAR classes where they had proved satisfactory. They were employed on the system’s heaviest freight services, principally in connection with movement of ore from the Copper Belt in Northern

Works plate No. 7548 intended for Class AD-60 No. 6046, a locomotive despatched to NSWGR but never assembled.

281

Beyer-Garratt

Rhodesian Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 20.

Rhodesia (later Zambia) and in handling coal mined in Southern Rhodesia (later Zimbabwe). Their capacity was proven with their ability to haul 1400 tons up compensated 1 in 64 gradients between Kafue and Broken Hill.

No. 11182 which also included the first ten of Class 20A. The individual orders are summerised in the table to the left, dimentional details appear lower left, differing dimensions for Class 20A are set out below in this column. Further misfortune came with a head-on collision between Class 20A Nos. 726 and 760 at Magoye in February 1963. Due to staff shortages and non-availability of a spare boiler, repairs were only possible by cannibalisation and creation of one locomotives from the

The prototype [No. 700] was withdrawn following a headon collision at Kasavasa in 1956 as a result of which the second batch of 20th Class delivered in 1957 was increased from five to six. These locomotives were included in Order

pair. No. 726 was resurrected in this process although it was 1970 before the task was complete. Also, No. 730 was badly damaged and in store at Kabwe when passed into Zambia Railways stock and probably did no more work. With the split of the system between Zambia and Rhodesia (later Zimbabwe) in 1967, those listed opposite became the property of Zambia Railways while retaining their original numbers. Four of these locomotives were transferred back to Rhodesian Railways, believed to be about 1978 but their specific identities are unconfirmed. (No. 710 was reportedly one of these engines but it is not included in the list above). They suffered from inadequate maintenance in Zambia but soldiered on until complete dieselisation in the mid to late 1970s. Motive power on through services between the two systems was swapped at Victoria Falls Bridge and until 1973, an example would appear almost daily from the Zambian side.

282

Indian summer

Three quarter view of Class 20.

Class 20 at work on a loaded coal train.

283

Beyer-Garratt

Drawing of Class 20.

The Rhodesia/ Zimbabwe contingent was subjected to refurbishment programme from 1980 onward and as late survivors of the epoch are described in Chapter 13 ‘Last Bastions’. South Australian Rlys. (SAustR) [Gauge 3’ 6”] Class 400 In the early 1950s, SAustR faced a motive power crisis caused by increases in coal tonnages mined at Leigh Creek and in minerals extracted from Broken Hill in New South Wales. The bulk of this traffic was handled by 4-8-0 Class T which dated from 1903. As a stopgap, six examples of the Australian Standard Garratt were purchased from Western Australian Government Railway to become SAustR Class 300. They were in service for about 18 months, proving as unpopular as elsewhere but they at least gave crews useful experience in working with articulated locomotives. Class 300 was replaced by the final derivative of the 4-82+2-8-4 STALIG Light Garratt. The ten examples of Class 400 were built in 1952/ 3 for SAustR by Société Franco-Belge under licence as Gorton Foundry was fully committed. As with the locomotives for Queensland Government Railways, they bore works plates numbered in the BP series. The thirty examples built for the Queensland and South Australian systems were rare examples of French-built locomotives at work in Australasia. The original STALIG format had included the capacity for easy conversion from metre to 3’ 6” gauge and Class 400

had a variation on this theme with adaptability for 3’ 6”, 4’ 8.5” or 5’ 3” gauges. With the intended development of the standard gauge trans-Australia route from Sydney to Perth, the state’s network would make use of all three gauges although the conversion option was never required. These were by far the heaviest and most powerful locomotives on the SAustR 3’ 6” gauge system. They were delivered between June 1953 and February 1954, and immediately took over the mineral traffic described above. They sometimes worked as far south as Terowie and Port Pirie and were occasionally used on passenger services to Broken Hill. These locomotives had short careers with withdrawal commencing in the 1960s with three remaining in service as at 31 December 1964 and six in store. The latter group returned to service between 1968 and 70 to cover for diesel locomotives undergoing conversion from 3’ 6’ to standard gauge. Once this process was completed, the class was withdrawn; No. 402 is preserved in Adelaide. Sierra Leone Government Railway [Gauge 2’ 6”] The SLGR had relied on six-coupled Garratts from the 1920s but wartime conditions led to the conversion of several to 2-8-0 power bogies although how this was achieved and the identity of the locomotives so treated remains unverified. This exercise confirmed the importance of eight-coupled engines to cope with actual wartime and projected later traffic levels. Order No. 11169 led to introduction of a most interesting eight-coupled Garratt class. This was the last

South Australian Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 400. This comparatively short-lived class of ten was a welcome replacement to six Australian Standard Garratts (classified 300) which had been purchased second-hand to cope with a sudden expansion in traffic volumes in the early 1950s.

284

Indian summer collection and cosmetically restored, is now on public display.

South Australian Railways Class 400

Sierra Leone 4-8-2+2-8-4

fresh design to emerge from Gorton and in many respects as impressive as the giants of the 4-8-2+2-8-4 wheel arrangement built in the post-war period. They were the most powerful locomotives ever for such a narrow gauge and worked proficiently on 30 lb/ yard rails, enjoying careers of a little over 20 years. When SLGR closed completely in 1976, the system was still relying on steam power for about half its needs with these Garratts to the fore. Following closure it was widely believed that all mobile equipment was sold to Japanese breakers but apparently a well-placed official, realising that important pieces of history were about to be lost, discretely arranged for certain items to be saved. These moves were carried out in secret with artefacts hidden away in a railway warehouse where they lay apparently forgotten for many years until discovery and transfer into a specially created National Railway Museum in Freetown. Beyer Garratt No. 73 was part of this ‘Lazarus’

Conclusion A BP board minute dated 25 November 1958 referred to the supply of seven 2’ 0” gauge Class NG/G locomotives to Tsumeb Corporation, South Africa (as described in Chapter 6). With slight changes from the earlier production runs, these were the last Garratts built at Gorton Foundry; the first of this type had been built there in 1937 and in 1967, the final examples were provided by another manufacturer. This extended manufacturing story provided a fitting epitaph to the inherent qualities of the Garratt concept, and its unquestioned superiority over other forms of articulated steam locomotive.

285

Beyer-Garratt

During gauge conversion to 4’ 8½”, Class 400 No. 404 waits to depart from Peterborough, South Australia with a mixed train for Terowie on 15 August 1969. JG Beckhaus

Drawing of Class 400.

BP’s final completely fresh design was the 4-8-2+2-8-4 type for 2’ 6” gauge Sierra Leone Government Railways. It was as impressive as any member of the ‘Indian Summer’ family in view of the combination of modernity, size, power and narrowness of gauge.

286

287

Drawing of the SLGR 4-8-2+2-8-4.

Rear three-quarter view of the SLGR 4-8-2+2-8-4.

Indian summer

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 13 : Last bastions

East African Class 56 No. 5604 at Mombasa. Built for service in the Far East, STALIG-derived BP works Nos. 7280-5 were diverted to East Africa as Kenya Uganda Railway Class EC6 Nos. 122-7 and almost immediately received their EAR classification and numbers. They were later transferred to the Tanganyika section but had returned to Kenya by the time of this photograph. Brian Walker

lthough Gorton-built Garratts worked on five continents, from the mid-1920s Africa was always home to the greatest numbers. The impact of the changes that transformed the continent in the second half of the 20th Century was adverse in some respects and unexpectedly favourable in others. A negative example was Angola where internal troubles wrought extensive damage, placing the hitherto efficient Benguela Railway almost completely out of commission together with that country’s other railway systems. Similar troubles affected Moçambique and in both countries, locomotives and rolling stock were consigned to uncertain fates. Elsewhere, the normal evolution from steam to modern traction proceeded although sometimes transition took longer than might have been expected. Political factors affecting the southern portion of Rhodesia Railways (which became National Railways of Zimbabwe in 1980) led to retention of steam well beyond scheduled redundancy dates. East African Railways Dieselisation commenced in the early 1970s and personal recollections confirm that Garratts were still prominent in the first half of 1973. The last survivors were predictably of classes 59 & 60 which worked until 1980/ 1. EAR had taken great pride in the fleet’s appearance, proudly complemented by handsome lined maroon livery. Later photographs reveal engines working covered with murram dust as maintenance standards started to decline.

was extended over a number of years. A survey dated 5 January 1981 showed that lengthy stretches of the South African system were still solely or mainly steam worked, and that 1638 locomotives in 26 different classes remained nominally available. However, those officially still on the books included engines in store and unlikely to work again. Nonetheless, there was probably well over a thousand still in normal service. Four classes of 3’ 6” Garratts were officially on the strength: GEA; GMA; GMAM; GO. All of the last-named class were by then in store and did no more work. Note that the years below indicate the position on 1 April annually. Class GEA: By 1973 only two examples had been withdrawn with allocations:

Year totals of locomotives remaining in service: 1974 [48]; 1975 [45]; 1976 [16]; 1977 [nil] -

South African Railways With large indigenous coal reserves, motive power transition 288

Class GMA & GMAM: Until 1962, 100 locomotives were GMAM and the remainder GMA. From then, route availability was increased by conversions to GMA. By 1969 the distribution was GMAM [49]; GMA [69]; withdrawn [2]. Late allocations were:

Last bastions

The numbers in service with SAR:

The final trio were at Waterval Boven engaged on shunting and trip duties. Class members were on hire to Zimbabwe 1980 [22] & 1981 [6]; to Moçambique 1981 [8], 1982 [7] & 1983 [6]. -

Class GO: Around 1972, this class was concentrated in the northern coastal region of Natal, allocated to Stanger, Empangeni and Gingindlovu, often working in partnership with a GMA/M or another GO prior to route electrification. They then moved to the route north to Gollel on the Swaziland border, and were also used on the Eshowe and Nwaklini branches where they replaced Classes GE and GEA. They were removed from the Eshowe line because their fire-throwing damaged crops and were replaced by GEAs before diesels took over. Their careers lasted only about 22 years. In 1974 the class was still intact; two were withdrawn in 1975; 19 in 1976. From 1977 until 1983 all were stored at De Aar. No 2576 was retained for preservation but the remainder were scrapped by 1984.

Class NGG11: Nos NGG-54/ 55 were working shunting and transfer trip duties from Humewood Road depot, Port Elizabeth in 1973 but were replaced by diesels in October 1974.

In April 1992, Spoornet which was the railway division of Transnet Ltd, the national transport organisation (formed 1990), transferred all remaining ex-SAR steam locomotives to Transnet Museum, later Transnet Heritage Foundation. Also, ordinary steam operations ceased that year. The bulk of the fleet was earmarked for scrapping and museum locomotives were concentrated at Millsite, Krugersdorp, Southern Transvaal which was the location of museums’ main store and workshops, and at Voorbaa, Mosse Bay in the Cape Midland Region. National Railways of Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesian Railways) Rhodesian Railways, which had run the integrated network of Southern Rhodesia (later Zimbabwe) and Northern Rhodesia (later Zambia), was split in 1967 with some of the fleet passing to Zambia National Railways. Dieselisation was completed in Zambia in the mid-1970s although some steam engines were retained in reserve and occasionally used thereafter. Modernisation was delayed in Zimbabwe (previously Southern Rhodesia) by the political and economic situation brought about by the Unilateral Declaration of Independence.

On the 2’ 0” gauge SAR network, later surviving Garratts tended to be longer-lived than their larger companions: -

Class NGG16: This was the last 2’ 0” gauge class to remain intact. In 1973 six were on the Cape Midland system but by July 1974, they had been moved to Natal where the remainder were based. They worked principally on the systems stemming from Umzinto and Port Shepstone with some enjoying a new lease of life on the Alfred County Railway as described in Chapter 6.

It had been originally intended that the southern section of the system would be dieselised by 1980, the year in which National Railways of Zimbabwe was formed. However, the circumstances that prevented acquisition of adequate motive power and fuel oil supplies necessitated refurbishment of the more modern surviving Garratts, specifically Classes 14A, 15A, 16A, and 20th/20A. Thus four different wheel arrangements were retained although there was interchangeability of parts eg the boiler used on Classes 15A and 16A. It was over 20 years since Gorton Foundry’s withdrawal from steam locomotive production,

289

Beyer-Garratt and hence from provision of technical or manufacturing support. Prolongation of working lives was an exercise in self-reliance, made viable by the technology’s inherent simplicity and ruggedness. Facilities and numbers of technical staff at Bulawayo works were inadequate for the task so much work was passed to independent contractors, principally locally-based ZECO (formerly RESSCO). Work included rebuilding where necessary, modernisation of certain features, and fitting of roller bearings on all axles. The last-named measure was particularly effective which begs the question why this modification had not been implemented earlier in Rhodesia and elsewhere. The programme started in 1978 and took about four years to complete. With the rundown in steam in South Africa, Class GMA/ GMAM became surplus to requirements and twenty-six were hired to National Railways of Zimbabwe from August 1979 until September 1981 to relieve a motive power shortage during the refurbishment programme. Nos. 4059/ 60/ 4/ 5/ 70/ 1/ 87/ 9/ 90/ 98/ 9/ 102/ 3/ 11/ 2/ 7/ 20/ 1/ 5/ 6/ 9/ 34/ 5/ 7/ 9/ 40 were deployed on a rotational basis, nominally allocated to Capital Park, Pretoria to which they returned for service and repairs. They operated from Bulawayo, to Gwelo, Hwange (formerly Wankie) and Victoria Falls. Six were lent on by RR for a short period to Caminhos de Ferro de Moçambique to work between Beira and Umtali. In accordance with local practice, they usually worked with smokebox leading, and the auxiliary water tender trailing. During the early stages of the hire period there was still guerrilla activity in the bush which necessitated armourplated cab protection. Although dimensionally similar to Rhodesian Railways 20th Class, they were found to have a heavier appetite and were occasionally abandoned en route, having run out of fuel. The cause does not seem to have been established although earlier RR had countered this problem by increasing bunker capacities. Known details of the NRZ refurbishment programme which are believed to be correct up to about year 2000: Class 14A This class had always been solely based in Southern Rhodesia so all were naturally retained in Zimbabwe for continued use on freight, branch and shunting duties. On withdrawal,

a remarkable number survived for further careers. Disposal of Nos. 512/ 520/ 523 formed a single transaction as did also Nos 512 & 516, latter apparently for charter work. It is unclear exactly what “mothballed” meant or what was the ultimate fate of those engines. The position concerning Nos. 510/ 14/ 15/ 17/ 19/ 25 seemed ambiguous with the implication that although set aside for preservation, they had a secondary role as forming a motive power reserve that could be called up at short notice. No. 524 was offered for sale in 1994 but then returned to traffic in 1995 to provide steam for cleaning carriage stock and also to work as Bulawayo shed pilot; final disposal details are unknown. Class 15th/ 15A Earlier boiler rotation had already confused the differentiation between 4-6-4+4-6-4 15th Class (180 lb/ sq in) and Class 15A (200 lb/ sq in) but refurbishment involved only the higher pressure version. Only locomotives built as members of Class 15A were treated under the programme (following refurbishment, they dropped the ‘A’ suffix and became 15th Class). By reference to Chapter 8, these were:

For details of the individual locomotives as listed below, refer to Chapter 8, Page 157. Elements of this class continued in service beyond their planned 1994 retirement. By the year 2000, it was expected that they would work only until the next general repair and then be set aside for cannibalisation to provide spare parts. However in 2006/ 7, ten locomotives received minor repairs and returned to duty on suburban services, shunting and some special trains. By 2016, only two remained operable [reportedly Nos. 395 & 414] for hire on colliery work or charter services. The presence of these late survivors confirms that the Garratt locomotive was in ordinary commercial service somewhere in the world for over one hundred years. The sale of No. 398 meant that at long last, New Zealand had a competent six-coupled Garratt, albeit in preserved form. See upper table opposite for disposal details.

290

Last bastions

Class 16A As with Class 14A, the status/ disposal of (second) Nos. 601/ 7/ 10/ 11/ 12/ 13 seem uncertain as they may have had a secondary role as part of a motive power reserve. Nos. 627, 634 & 639 were on loan to CFM Moçambique from November 1975 and were stranded in that country following closure of the border due to terrorist activity. They were returned in June 1981 in very poor condition and were nominally allocated the new numbers 616-8 in the same order although whether they carried their new identities is doubtful. No. 639 [618] was scrapped in 1982 and the other two supposedly so in August 1983, although both were reported to be in Bulawayo workshops in 1993.

This contradiction serves as cautionary note regarding the identities and dispositions of the Garratt fleets late in their careers Class 20th/ 20A With break-up of the system in 1967, thirty-five of Class 20th/ 20A remained in Zambia but were out of normal service within a few years. Regarding the fifteen that stayed in Zimbabwe, they were joined by four locomotives returned from Zambia. Of this group, only No 710 [733] (works No. 7695) has been positively identified. All nineteen were included in the refurbishment programme:

291

Beyer-Garratt

The second running numbers 730-7 covered surviving Class 20th and numbers 740-50, the remaining Class 20A. The three preserved locomotives were passed into the care of the Museum at Bulawayo; works No. 7782 was purchased personally by AE Durrant and donated.

EAR Class 59 No. 5932 Ol’Donya Sabuk arriving at Nairobi with a freight from Mombasa on 24 February 1978. The rakish lines of these locomotives disguised their enormous size as the largest ever built for the metre gauge. Unless regularly cleaned, EAR engines quickly accumulated road dust known as murram. Brian Walker

A Class 60 as the author preferred to remember them. No. 6011 was on Nairobi depot displaying the EAR lined maroon livery which looked very fine on this operator’s imposing fleet. This class was almost identical to Class 56.

292

Last bastions

EAR Class 57 No. 5711 restored as KUR Class EC3 No. 87 (originally named Karamoja) and on display at Nairobi Railway Museum. Its presence there is most appropriate considering the extraordinary contribution made by these engines during World War 2 over the Mombasa-Nairobi artery. Unfortunately the Giesl ejector was fitted around 12 years after the demise of KUR.

Ex-Antofagasta (Chilli) and Bolivia Railway (FCAB) 4-8-2+2-8-4 No. 906 Tumari on shed at Uyuni on 11 October 1974. Authenticated information about the late careers of South America engines is scanty but while looking the worse for wear, this example appears to be still in serviceable condition. No. 906 was one of the six supplied in 1950 as an updated version of 1929 trio. The only major change was in the tank styling; one of the earlier batch, identifiabl by its old-fashioned tank style but in similar condition, is standing behind. Ex-FCAB 4-6-2 No. 755 is to the left. At the time of this photograph, the railway was understood to be a division of Antofagasta plc, a Chilean multinational mining conglomerate. Steam remained in use until about 1980.

293

Beyer-Garratt

Another form of preservation concerned Great Western Railway of Brazil/ North Eastern Railway No. 612. Built by Henschel in 1952, this was a pure BP design on which work had commenced before the war and which formed the basis for the successful STALIG type and its offspring. Standing at Recife station minus connecting rods and valve motion, the engine is nevertheless well cared for, reflecting the regard in which the design was held locally. South African Railways Class GMAM No. 4085 taking water through the filler of the auxiliary tender at Devondale on a southbound service over the Kimberley-Mafeking route on 11 August 1982. Nicolas Trudgian

294

Last bastions

Photographic selection has tried to minimise derelict locomotives but this view of Class GM No. 2292 at Millsite dump has been included specifically because this important type failed to be included in the preservation ranks. This engine still looked largely complete on 11 July 1985. Nicolas Trudgian

Randfontein Estates Gold Mine No. 9 Kathy which had been SAR Class GMA/M No 4128 in its earlier career was hard at work with auxiliary tender leading on Thursday 11 July 1985. Nicolas Trudgian

295

Beyer-Garratt

Class NG-G16 No. NG149 was one mile west of Hlutankungu on 31 July 1982 with a freight working apparently mainly comprising timber pit props, bound for Umzinto some 93 miles distant. Nicolas Trudgian

On 18 July 1985, Class NG-G16 No. NG116 was climbing away from Izingolweni, Natal on the line from Port Shepstone to Harding very shortly before this route passed out of SAR control. It was later partly restored as a heritage line, excluding this northern section. At the time this route was worked in two sections with Garratts meeting and exchanging trains at roughly halfway along the route. This engine is now working back to Harding and its home shed. Nicolas Trudgian

296

Last bastions

The general utility role filled by ex-Rhodesian Railways 2-6-2+2-5-2 Class 14A on branch line duties, local working and shunting is portrayed in this view which shows why Bulawayo was such a Mecca for Garratt fans in the 1980s. No. 508 is centre stage with the aluminium-bodied box car; No. 512 is standing partially hidden by the station sign and the building; in the left distance No. 524 is engaged in shunting. Nicolas Trudgian 15th Class No. 392 Ithaka paused at Victoria Falls station on 23 July 1985. Nicolas Trudgian

297

Beyer-Garratt

On 26 July 1985, 2-8-2+2-8-2 16th Class No. 605 was captured working a freight train at Mbalabala on the BulawayoWest Nicholson branch. On that day this route was being worked by five Garratts. This photograph highlights the hazards of locomotive identification during the later years of steam in Zimbabwe. This engine entered service in service as Class 16A No. 635 in 1953 and assumed this number during the 1979-83 fleet refurbishment programme. The original No. 605 was 2-8-2+2-8-2 16th Class built in 1929 and sold into industrial service in 1964. Nicolas Trudgian

Large Garratts as they are most fondly remembered. 4-8-2+2-8-4 20th Class No. 741 Bubi is hard at work heading a heavy coal train from Hwange colliery on 24 July 1985. The location is Baobab Curve (named after the outlandishly shaped trees with swollen trunks found in the area), a favourite spot for photographers on the Victoria Falls-Bulawayo route, south of Thompson Junction. The Garratt is climbing into the hills towards the only tunnel on the system. Nicolas Trudgian

298

Last bastions

Zimbabwe Railways Class 14A No. 514 receiving attention at private contractors Zeco on 29 July 1993. John Tolson

Livingstone shed yard, Zambia on 5 August 1993 with derelict 2-8-2+2-8-2 Class 16A No. 621 and 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 20A No. 752 standing behind. These locomotives were transferred by Rhodesia Railways to Zambia Railways in 1967. They retained their original numbers and livery but some of the transferred engines received evidence of their new ownership in the form of large initials ‘ZR’ painted on the trailing tank side, as can just be discerned on the Class 20A. Dieselisation was completed much earlier in Zambia than in Zimbabwe and all steam replaced by 1990 or possibly earlier. John Tolson

299

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 14 : Ideas and proposals

ther than through detailed improvements and progressive increases in size and weight, the essential principles initiated before the Great War remained constant throughout the Garratt story. Divergences such as compound steam and multi-cylinder power bogies, were peripheral to the main theme and without lasting impact. The good riding qualities that characterised most Garratts were accentuated in the Tasmanian eight-cylinder double Atlantics but introduced the penalty of cramped conditions between the frames. In regions where large locomotives worked over substantial distances remote from workshop support, inside cylinders were unpopular as heavy components such as connecting rods hampered repair work. The demands of accessibility made outside cylinders and motion obligatory rather than discretionary. Further, for the most part Garratts were masters of heavy loads in adverse circumstances so their medium pace avoided punishing the track that might otherwise be inflicted by hammer blow generated at higher speeds. Alternative ideas were investigated and drawings prepared on a few occasions but the soundness of the Garratt concept meant that these excursions proceeded no further. The Garratt-Mallet In 1908, Baldwin was one of three entities with whom BP concluded licence arrangements for manufacture of Garratts. BP’s logic in entering this transaction is hard to divine as with so much committed to the Mallet type, there was no evident incentive for Baldwin to promote a competing concept however attractive its potential might appear. Baldwin’s motivation might have been purely defensive as the exclusivity gained could prevent U.S. market penetration by competitors. When asked why no progress had been made with Garratt promotion in North America (see Chapter 3), Cyril Williams’s reply was diplomatic and with perhaps tacit acknowledgment that the Baldwin connection had resulted in a lost opportunity.

The 1927 Garratt-Mallet (described in The Beyer Peacock Quarterly Review as the ‘Super-Garratt’) was of its time. The eight-coupled power bogie had yet to achieve prominence as thus far it was represented by only 12 locomotives (six designs) introduced in 1925 and another 12 (three designs) the following year. An interesting feature of this proposed titan was the cab and cantilevered bunker which anticipated the New Zealand double pacific of 1928, and was probably the first exercise in which the short-lived semi-Union Garratt idea was considered. Two diagrams were prepared for Cape and Standard Gauge versions which suggest that the prospective markets identified were South Africa and the USA. The concept was considered to have sufficient credence for patent registration (No. 230888) but in both cases the feasibility looked questionable for reasons such as: -

complex steam circuit ‘plumbing’ needed for the engine units the extreme length of both versions boiler capacity needed to feed eight large cylinders adequacy of the bunker capacity limited range of duties where such a machine could be employed.

Unfortunately the two diagrams published in July 1928 are small scale making it impossible to confirm some of the dimensions, especially on the standard gauge version. However, so far as can be divined the boiler pitch is 10’ 9” and the outside boiler diameter appears to be about 10’ (cf the Russian engine at 9’ 10”) which leaves little doubt that this diagram was prepared with the USA market in mind. The heaviest traffic demands facing South African Railways were met from 1929 with Class GL 4-8-2+2-8-4 although in later years, redeployment was constrained by route availability limitations. Classes GM and GMA/M provided a more flexible solution as the heaviest loads were tackled through the expedient of double-heading.

An artist’s impression of how the giant GarrattMallet might have appeared.

300

Ideas and proposals at 1 in 13, and with curves as sharp as five chains radius necessitating use of the Fell system. This incorporated a third, large double-headed rail centrally mounted on pedestals between and slightly above the level of the two ordinary rails. Specially-designed locomotives operated with normal adhesion on the outside rails but also had an inside engine between the frames which drove two pairs of horizontally mounted flangeless wheels. These ‘gripping wheels’ were forced against the centre rail by means of large laminated compression springs. The entire locomotive therefore relied solely on adhesion where the only alternative would have been rack-and-pinion drive. In addition to the conventional Westinghouse brakes, the engines had two pairs of brake blocks that clamped by means of laminated springs on to the sides of the centre rail during descent. Additional brake power was provided by ‘Fell vans’ that were marshalled into the consist. These vehicles had brakes that were activated in broadly similar fashion against the centre rail. Brake blocks rarely survived two return trips on the incline.

Proposals for the Rimutaka Incline, New Zealand The Rimutaka Incline presented a severe challenge between Cross Creek and Summit on the New Zealand Railways route from Featherston in the Wairarapa to Upper Hutt and southward on to Wellington. In three miles, southbound trains climbed 869 feet at mainly 1 in 15 with short stretches

Six Fell-equipped 0-4-2Ts worked the line (four built by Avonside Engine Co in 1875 and two by Neilson & Co in 1886). The Avonside engines had Joy’s valve gear on the outside cylinders while the Neilson machines used Stephenson’s link motion. All relied on a modified form of Walschaerts valve gear for the inside cylinders. The cylinder dimensions were 14” x 16” outside and 12” x 14” inside. Driving wheel diameters were 2’ 8” outside and 1’ 11.5” inside horizontal. Boiler pressure was 160 lb/ sq in and the all-up locomotive weight was almost 40 tons. Each locomotive was rated to haul 65 tons and the maximum permitted load per freight train was 260 tons. One engine led with three more equally spaced within the consist (as were also the Fell vans) so that each handled its own 65ton load. Passenger trains often required five locomotives,

301

Beyer-Garratt

Termed the ‘Super-Garratt” by Beyer Peacock, this drawing depicts the 3’ 6” gauge version which was probably intended for the South African market. In view of the difficulties in later years in finding suitable work for the superb South African Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GL on account of route availability limitations, it is doubtful whether this giant could have found sufficient work to justify the investment.

This drawing of the alternative standard gauge form of Super-Garratt was probably prepared with the north American market in mind.

The proposed Fell/ Garratt of 1926 as a possible solution to the challenge of the Rimutaka Incline in New Zealand was another revolutionary (and possibly the most complex) variation of the type ever envisaged by BP.

302

Ideas and proposals

The geared Garratt proposed for the New Zealand problem in 1931 was a further variation with imaginative ideas.

also equally spaced. Descending trains worked with all locomotives bunker-first and coupled together at the head. Ordinary locomotives worked services to either end of the Incline and then handed over to the 0-4-2Ts. The whole process was enormously time-consuming with operations frequently hampered by adverse weather - rain, mist, or high winds. At one point (known as ‘Siberia’), wind breaks were erected after coaches had been blown off the track into a ravine. Typical working speeds were 6 mph uphill and 10 mph down. Conventional locomotives were occasionally deputed to help out but it was remarkable that these vintage 0-4-2Ts worked the section for so long. Like grandfather’s pipe, little of the original engines probably remained at their retirement in 1955. The incline spawned several ideas to replace the 0-4-2Ts but only one took real form. In 1905 NZR designed and built No. E66, a 2-6-6-0T Mallet 8-cylinder Vauclain Compound with the cylinders mounted to the rear of the trailing power unit below the cab, and with a Vanderbilt firebox. This was a powerful, slow speed performer with adequate haulage capacity but cab conditions were intolerably hot. It was later tried as a banker on the Ngaio climb out of Wellington where normal operating speeds were higher than it could manage, leading to its ignominious withdrawal in 1917. In 1926, Gorton proposed an 0-6-0+0-6-0 Garratt with both bogies equipped with the Fell system apparently similar to that used with the 0-4-2Ts and would have been a powerful machine. The second proposal dated 1931 was another 0-6-0+0-6-0 Garratt, this time with back-to-front inclined inside cylinders mounted directly above the centre axle. Walschaerts valve gear connected with a crank axle mounted ahead of and above the line of the leading driving axle. This crank axle would drive a secondary axle through 3.5 : 1 reduction gearing to work a jack shaft connection to the driving wheels. As a slow speed locomotive, it was intended to eliminate reliance on the Fell system.

It seems probable that NZR was wary of these and any other proposals, based on the adverse experience with Mallet No. E66. By 1932, deteriorating economic conditions would have discouraged detailed consideration of these ideas, quite apart from the adverse experience with 4-6-2+2-6-4 Class G.

303

Beyer-Garratt

A regrettable side outcome to the 4-6-2+2-6-4 New Zealand Railways Class G debacle was non-acceptance of this smaller and more conventional Garratt proposed for services to Taranaki.

Although takeover of the Wellington and Manawatu Railway in 1907 had allowed redirection of traffic to the western seaboard route, the incline remained as a costly operation. A quantum leap in locomotive size was proposed by North British Locomotive Co in 1931 in the form of two Garratt designs, a 2-6-0+0-6-2 and an 0-8-0+0-8-0. That same year this manufacturer supplied ten 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts to Kenya Uganda Railway (see Chapter 10) and the NZ approach suggests a serious attempt was being mounted to break into BP’s market. Double pacific proposed for Taranaki, New Zealand In 1930, BP prepared plans for a four-cylinder 4-6-2+2-6-4 Garratt for the less arduous route from Wellington to the port of New Plymouth in Taranaki, the region at the western extremity of the North Island. This more conventional and

modestly proportioned design would have been a better means of penetrating the NZ market. However, operating problems with Class G were emerging as an issue with a political dimension which made acceptance of this proposal a forlorn hope. For dimensions see Table lower left. United Kingdom – the Big Four As described in the relevant chapters, the LNER and LMS had invested in Garratts during the 1920s and these experiences evidently failed to excite interest with the other two companies during that decade. However, there were initiatives involving both the Southern and Great Western railways during the 1930s, in part stimulated by BP’s difficulties in finding further custom in its traditional markets. Dimensions for Southern Railway (UK) proposal

304

Ideas and proposals Southern Railway Persistent difficulties in working boat train services over the Eastern Section had induced Richard Maunsell to investigate the introduction of 4-cylinder pacifics. A design limited to a maximum speed of 80 mph was cleared by the civil engineer in 1933 but the project was dropped because of the high unit cost for a limited number of what would have been a specialised type. Consideration was then given in 1935 to a 6-cylinder 4-6-2+2-6-4 with a broader range of use. This design included long-travel Walschaerts valve gear, 10” piston valves, Belpaire firebox and a ‘steam rotational selftrimming bunker’. Known key dimensions for the proposed Garratt appear above on page 304:

that had developed through FC Hall’s involvement with Iran and that country’s acquisition of four 4-8-2+2-8-4 Garratts (see Chapter 10). Several factors militated against this initiative. Chief Mechanical Engineer CB Collett was generally opposed to outside influences on GWR motive power policy; both the proposed designs lacked inboard carrying axles by then regarded as a key element in the Garratt concept; Swindon had no experience in six-coupled locomotives with outside valve motion as would have been preferable in these cases; Class 28xx was widely regarded as the UK’s best heavy freight locomotive to date; there would have been

Proposed 4-6-0+0-6-4 for GWR.

The chief engineer vetoed the Eastern Section but would permit its deployment between Basingstoke and Exeter at a maximum speed of 75 mph. Use east of Basingstoke was prohibited because of limitations at Waterloo concerning locomotive and train length. Maunsell asked the Traffic Manager to investigate the possibility of all services west of Basingstoke being worked by ten Garratts, replacing 64 conventional locomotives. Further analysis showed that by working all freight at night, the number of locomotives to be replaced could reach 77. BP agreed to guarantee that their locomotives would work 140,000 to 160,000 miles between general repairs with availability enhanced by supply of spares – two boilers and one power bogie. BP was asked for a formal quote in March 1935 but the project was then dropped without recorded explanation. It is surmised that one factor was the cost of lengthening loops and sidings to accommodate the longer trains that the Garratts would handle. Great Western Railway There is no apparent evidence that the GWR started any enquiries about Garratts for its own use but it seems that BP took the initiative in the mid-1930s to propose two designs – a heavy freight 2-8-0+0-8-2 using power bogies derived from the Class 28xx Consolidation and a mixed traffic 4-60+0-6-4 as illustrated in the accompanying drawing. The power bogies were evidently based on the ‘Grange’ Class, probably the company’s most effective mixed traffic 4-6-0 type which entered service in 1936. It would seem that BP was opportunistically seeking to exploit the relationship

limited situations where the mixed traffic engine could be usefully employed. Even the presence of a tapered boiler surmounted by a typical safety valve bonnet failed to make an impact. Antofagasta (Chilli) & Bolivia Railway [Metre gauge] Many ideas never proceeded beyond the drawing stage and this is one such example. A straightforward design, its significance lay in the wheel arrangement which suggests that the Rhodesian 15th Class’s success had encouraged BP to promote the 4-6-4+4-6-4 wheel arrangement elsewhere. In 1950, this railway did order more Garratts but they were 4-8-2+2-8-4s in the form of an up-dated pre-war design. For key dimensions see Table on page 306. Indian Railways The sub-continent remained essentially a market of largely unrealised potential so far as Garratts were concerned, notwithstanding the strong British influence pre-1947. With longer term sales prospects declining in the 1950s, hopes of a breakthrough must have been high when a serious enquiry for 4-8-2+2-8-4s was received in 1954. Unfortunately, BP’s tender failed as German and Japanese competitors both quoted prices for a pair of Class WG-type conventional locomotives that were less than that for a single Garratt. Although interest from India did not finally abate until 1958, it was clear that the independent nation presented an even greater challenge than it had pre-war which was a cogent sign of changing times. The line drawing on page 306 depicts the sort of locomotive that BP had unsuccessfully proposed.

305

Beyer-Garratt

The Antofagasta Railway was an established customer and BP proposed a 4-6-4+4-6-4 Garratt after the war, probably on the back of the impressive record of Rhodesia Railways’ Class 15th/ 15A family.

first proposal was essentially an enlargement of Class 59 while the other two displayed some extraordinary ‘blue sky’ thinking. The second Class 61 version would have been a 4-8-4+48-4 with the addition of a condensing tender. This idea was apparently derived from the vehicles designed by Henschel and supplied with

Line drawing depicting the 4-8-2+2-8-4 proposed for Indian Railways.

East African Railways The work undertaken to introduce the tapered axle loading configuration with 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class 59 was evidently sufficiently successful to encourage plans for three even larger Garratt designs, all notionally christened Class 61. The

South African Railways 4-8-4 Class 25 for use over routes with inadequate water supplies. The third possibility was basically similar to the second but without the condensing equipment. EAR’s Chief Mechanical Engineer when unveiling this proposal noted that the boiler capacity would be 70%

306

307

Against the backdrop of a recently completed 4-8-2+2-8-4 EAR Class 60, this group photograph includes 180-200 persons which must have represented a considerable portion of the company workforce in the mid-1950s.

The design studies that went into the weight distribution of Class 59 thereby enabling these enormous locomotives to work efficiently on metre gauge track were developed to contemplate even larger machines using the 4-8-4+4-8-4 wheel arrangement that had served EAR so well.

Ideas and proposals

Beyer-Garratt greater than that of Class 59 yielding an ability to haul 1800 tons up a 1 in 150 gradient at 16 mph. He added that full exploitation of such a machine would require a revised form of coupling, strengthened bridges and lengthened sidings. The exercise was interesting in exploring greater size and weight potential but would require substantial infrastructural investment. A major element in the Garratt’s success had been its compromise role in enabling larger motive power and hence greater train loads while avoiding costly civil engineering works. In the early 1950s, other ideas explored included a lighter version of Class 59 with facilities for installation of a mechanical stoker, should reversion to coal-firing be necessary. Another was consideration of a light 2-6-2+2-6-2 for branch line duties, based on Rhodesian Railways Class 14A. This would have been the first six-coupled Garratt in East Africa.

308

Ideas and proposals Axle loadings for East African Railways’ proposals

Below. A Beyer Peacock-commissioned watercolour painting by Vic Welch, c 1952. This shows a long distance passenger train, hauled by a conceptual 4-8-2+2-8-4 Beyer-Garratt with additional water tender. This was a promotional concept for Queensland Government Railways which depicted a possible future form for their 1,043-mile ‘Sunshine Express’. QGR had started to take delivery of STALIG-based Garratts in 1950 while the boiler shrouding behind the side sheeting was reminiscent of the semi-streamlining applied to the rigid-framed 4-8-2s that had been supplied to the Silverton Tramway (South Australia & New South Wales) in 1951. The concept seems to have been a fusion of ideas based on prototypes then in service in Australia, This painting by the well-known railway artist is believed to have hung in the Beyer Peacock board room. Simon Colbeck Collection

309

Beyer-Garratt

Chapter 15 : Closing years

The background to this picture is one of amazing good fortune. During a safari to South Africa in July 1985 and after an exhausting exploration of steam in the Johannesburg area, Nicolas Trudgian with other enthusiasts was being driven south to visit the busy motive power depot at Kimberley. Highway 12 parallels the Johannesburg-Kimberley electrified main line and all but the driver were catching up on sleep when Nicolas awoke from his doze precisely at a point north-east of Warrenton where the car was abreast of a stationary Garratt. But it was not just “a” but “the” Garratt – a Class GL, a type that had been out of service for some years. No. 2351 was on tow from storage at either Kimberley or De Aar to Millsite locomotive works for restoration when it suffered a hot axlebox. The attendant crew were much concerned about delays to traffic on this busy route but were quite happy that this iconic machine should be photographed in its unfortunate predicament. By then a GL on the move, even if temporarily held up, was highly improbable. Enthusiasts of a certain age all have recollections of near misses and lost opportunities that will for ever reside among their list of life’s regrets. It is thus fitting to conclude this account with a “feel good” story. This locomotive, duly restored, now resides at Outeniqua Transport Museum in George, Western Cape while classmate No. 2352 is safely housed in the Science+Industry Museum, Manchester. Were ever a pair of memorials to a magnificent machine ever more appropriately located?

wenty years and more into the 21st Century, it is hard to appreciate the scale of reconstruction that faced a broken world in 1945. Railways had played a major role in the struggle to restore peace and there were grounded expectations that the steam locomotive would play a major role in transportation during the necessary period of rebuilding, and into succeeding years. In the mid-1940s, it was accepted that diesel and electric traction would inevitably expand but there was a broadlybased conviction that traditional construction would be necessary for another 25 years. This belief in continuation of general service steam locomotives into the 1980s or later was widespread, and reflected the industry’s embedded

conservatism. Samuel Vauclain, eminent industrialist and chairman of Baldwin Locomotive Co had predicted in 1930 that steam would remain the dominant source of motive power for another 50 years. Ralph P Johnson, that manufacturer’s chief engineer broadly endorsed this view in 1945 stating that ‘the ruggedness of the steam locomotive cannot be overlooked’ and that ‘the qualities that have made it popular heretofore will ensure it a large place in future locomotive inventories’. In the immediate term, demands placed upon Beyer Peacock and other steam locomotive producers were intense. Gorton Foundry’s production measured in gross tonnage

310

Closing years of locomotives sold grew from 6,214 in calendar 1947 to 10,376 in 1956, a 67% increase. Careful management of all resources was critical given that in October 1950, the order book exceeded £10 million. Over an extended period, Gorton Foundry worked day and night, seven days a week and remained short of the skilled labour needed to cope. Raw material supplies could suffer delay and quality of semi-manufactured components could prove sub-standard leading to rejection and further hold-ups. Such shortages were common across heavy industry and investment to improve production efficiency was problematic. During 1955, a heavy duty wheel lathe and two vertical boring and turning machines were acquired and £70,000-worth of additional machine tools was ordered but extreme delivery delays were common. The most graphic example concerned the planing of bar frames which often had to be contracted out, provided another manufacturer with spare capacity could be found. Planing machines were ordered at a cost of £50,000 in July 1954 but the last did not arrive until after locomotive manufacture had ceased in 1958. Thus 13 years after the war had ended, extreme supply delays were still adversely impacting upon production efficiency. Nevertheless, productivity (measured as tonnage sold per employee) was better than ever in the first half of the 1950s. Then demand for new steam locomotives collapsed and the reversal of BP’s fortunes came brutally fast. Sharing the production load In the first ten years or so of peace, the composition of customer needs changed radically. BP’s last tank locomotives were the two 0-6-4Ts eventually delivered to the Sligo Leitrim & Northern Counties Railway in 1951, as mentioned in Chapter 3. A total of 95 conventional tender engines were built 1945-52 for five operators and only seven more (for Peru only) thereafter with the last in 1957. Global postwar Garratt production was concentrated in the hands of BP or conducted under the company’s aegis with but one exception. This virtual monopolistic position was important for a manufacturer in an industry whose products faced impending obsolescence. Despite the unprecedented size of the Garratt order book, it was wisely decided to refrain from major investment in Gorton’s facilities beyond the machine tool acquisitions mentioned above. Looking beyond immediate prospects, there was underlying concern that sales would be unsustainable longer term in face of the emerging appetite for modern traction. Renewal or establishment of collaborative arrangements with other manufacturers allowed BP as main contractor to maintain customer relationships while retaining a slice of the trading margin on work laid off with others. There was possible risk in sharing technical experience, patent access etc with competitors but on balance this was judged acceptable. As matters evolved, the concern was overstated as other builders faced the same uncertainties. James Hadfield canvassed manufacturers for partners

and agreements were reached initially with Foges Usines et Fonderies, at Haine-Saint-Pierre, Belgium and Société Franco-Belge, Raisemes, France. A further deal followed with Henschel & Sohn, Kassel, Germany which revitalised an association that dated from the Garratt’s earliest days. These were joined by what might have been a surprising choice in North British Locomotive Co, given that organisation’s competitive tactics of earlier years. Although NBL’s condition was weak with significant spare productive capacity at the end of 1955, caution dictated inclusion of a preventative clause in the agreement concerning competition for Garratt orders before 1970. This measure proved unnecessary as NBL went into liquidation in 1962. Locomotives produced under these co-operative arrangements are summerised in the Table on Page 312. These arrangements worked largely as BP had intended but Krupp sold six 4-8-2+2-8-4s of its own design to Luanda Railway in 1954. This apparently breached an agreement with the German Locomotive Manufacturers Association dating from 1936 whereby no Garratts would be built without BP’s consent. Whether this was still valid seems doubtful but Krupp ignored it anyway. Otherwise the licencing regime stood firm. By the time Babcock & Wilcox supplied ten 2-8-2+2-8-2s to Red Nacional de los Ferrocarriles Españoles (RENFE) in 1960/ 1, BP no longer had interests to protect in steam locomotive construction. These engines were a modernised version of six supplied by the same manufacturer to Central of Aragon Railway in 1931. As in the case of the 2’ 0” gauge Class NG-G16s supplied by Hunslet Taylor & Co (Pty) Ltd, South Africa in 1967/ 8, some operators had long memories of a superb concept. Frustrated sales opportunities As global trading conditions stabilised, early prospects for further Garratt sales had looked encouraging. During the 1950s enquiries were received from Angola, Bolivia, China, India, Jordan, Mexico, Moçambique, Nepal and Nigeria. More promisingly, approaches came from loyal customers in Peru and Rhodesia but ultimately none bore fruit. As demand withered, it was apparent that reality was inconsistent with the ebullient hopes of a few years earlier. The coup de grâce for BP’s steam locomotive business came from an unexpected quarter through British Railways’ 1955 Modernisation Plan which foretold early elimination of steam. The UK market for steam was no longer of consequence to BP but many of the mechanical engineering staff in railways of the Commonwealth had trained with or had served as managers with the Big Four or BR. The new motive power policy had a ripple effect that induced a trend away from steam on a broader scale. What was judged good for BR was a powerful sign to others, enhanced by concern that technical support, new design initiatives and spare parts supply had a finite life.

311

Beyer-Garratt

Alternative activities Although decline in BP’s traditional business came faster than expected, management had been working on the search for alternative engineering products while reorganising and re-positioning part of Gorton Foundry to participate in construction consistent with British Railways’ new policies. This phase of BP’s corporate history lies outside the Garratt story but it is worth noting the remarks of Harold Wilmot in the Chairman’s report for 1963 ‘…the locomotive industry has changed its nature. Except for one or two great electrical companies for whom locomotives are of peripheral interest, the manufacturer makes less and less of the complete vehicle today. He has to purchase a number of important components, such as diesel engines, generators, traction motors and control equipment. He is therefore more concerned with the techniques of design, purchase and assembly.’

By then BP were completed supply of 101 examples of mixed traffic diesel locomotives for British Railways Western Region with Mekydro-design hydraulic transmission, universally known as “Hymeks’ and later classified 35 under TOPS (acronym for Total Operations Processing System). These engines were the versatile and effective end-product of a joint venture of the type to which Wilmot had alluded. Sadly, they proved a blind alley following a change in BR motive power policy which ruled Class 35 and dieselhydraulics generally to be non-standard. The Hymeks’ operational careers were cut short in yet another example of changing customer preference that had so often been the nemesis for independent locomotive manufacturers. The last locomotive completed by BP was a Type 2 Bo Bo dieselelectric for BR in early 1966, 112 years after Gorton works No. 1 had been supplied to the Great Western Railway.

312

Closing years In searching for a longer term future for the business, corporate thinking seems to have assumed that this could be achieved by securing new engineering activities to be housed within the Gorton Foundry complex. Hindsight suggests that this was the cart before the horse. The whole complexion of British industry was changing and processes born in the previous century were on the ebb. In the evolving manufacturing world, commercial activity increasingly relied on flexibility and nimbleness of action rather than in trying to force-fit a new enterprise into old fashioned bricksand-mortar. Such views espoused by hard-headed investors were typical of modern business sentiment and took little account of what Gorton Foundry meant to those who had worked there, nor of their intense pride in the extent and diversity of what had been achieved within its walls.

The Consolidated Balance Sheet of the Beyer Peacock group as at 31 December 1965 reflected an asset-rich organisation. Depreciated fixed assets totalled £1.4 million and current assets totalled £3.9 million (of which £460,000 were in cash and deposits). There was no long term debt and current liabilities totalled £2.1 million. Clearly the group had been wisely and conservatively managed, and financially was well placed to pursue diversification. However, its condition alerted the interests of corporate predators. In the years that followed there were several changes in ownership and organisational structures. Beyer, Peacock & Co Ltd, formed in 1883 to take over the founding partnership, had by 1980 been reduced to dormant status as the subsidiary of a large corporate group.

Epilogue Industrial archaeology in distant lands is a fascinating pastime. Discovery of machinery at a remote location either still gainfully employed or, more intriguingly, long abandoned and left to rot stimulates speculation about the history. Who decided on its acquisition and transportation over thousands of miles from its British manufacturer, and why? Was the venture of which it formed a part a success? For how long was it at work? Did it contribute significantly to advancement of the human condition? These and other questions are conjured, and many remain without satisfactory answer. With those large pieces of machinery known as BeyerGarratts, the history is better known and the rationale for their presence more readily understood. From the owneroperator’s standpoint, for all the type’s technical superiority it is contended that a single factor in its favour probably over-rode the others. As a rule of thumb, around 45-50% of a railway’s book assets are tied up in moveable items (locomotives, carriages, wagons) with the remainder in the physical infrastructure (permanent way, bridges, stations, buildings). It was logical that appointment of the civil engineer should precede that of his mechanical counterpart in formation of the enterprise, and he was typically the more senior of the pair in the corporate hierarchy. He thus exercised authority over his mechanical colleague, most effectively in protection of the infrastructure for which

he was directly responsible. There were cases where mechanical engineers considered themselves the more important but railway histories are riddled with examples where progressive locomotive proposals have foundered on the civil engineer’s veto. Thus the degree of acceptable locomotive enlargement lay outside the mechanical engineer’s discretion and while he might strive to satisfy the traffic manager’s needs, there was no easy way to determine whether the civil engineer’s limitations were reasonably based or unnecessarily restrictive and born of undue conservatism. Sanction or prohibition could be a dark art that might frustrate the mechanical engineer‘s aspirations and therein the BeyerGarratt bestowed an important advantage. Preceding rigid-framed types prescribed accepted weight and axle-loading limitations. The double power bogie layout, surmounted by that mighty boiler could be accommodated within those pre-determined constraints. The Beyer-Garratt was thus a brilliant compromise between the mechanical engineer’s ambitions, the civil engineer’s constraints, and the traffic manager’s demands. The role of the railway in difficult environments was thereby advanced at comparatively modest expense and societies thus served immeasurably benefited as a result.

313

Beyer-Garratt

Appendix A : Articulated designs and locomotive types

o far as can be determined, the year 1832 saw the first attempt to produce a recognisably articulated steam locomotive.

The first scientific assessment of alternative locomotive types capable of tackling steep gradients and sharp curvature appears to have been in connection with construction of the Semmering Railway in Austria, Europe’s first standard gauge mountain railway. The route connected Gloggnitz with Mürzzuschlag and there was a need for motive power to cope with 1 in 40 gradients and 210-yard radius curves while maintaining a constant speed of 7 mph. Comparative trials were conducted in 1851 prior to the railway’s opening and although the four competing designs met the operating criteria, none could satisfy the required reliability standards. However, these investigations led to adoption of the Engerth type which could operate at a constant speed of 12 mph. The list set out below is drawn mainly from Articulated Locomotives by Professor Lionel Wiener (Richard R Smith Inc, New York – 1930). This seminal work, widely and justly considered one the true “greats’ of locomotive literature, is comprehensive up to about 1928, to which some other examples have been added. A notable exception from Wiener’s massive study was articulated steam turbine machines. Professor Wiener provides voluminous information on a complex subject yet by his own estimate there were many more individual attempts to solve the articulation conundrum thus confirming that his study did not cover the complete field. Hopefully the reader will forgive any designs or actual locomotives that are considered to have been unreasonably omitted. The catalogue of the pioneering engineer’s inventive spirit includes some ideas that achieved patent protection

but never proceeded beyond the drawing board. Others succeeded only as far as a working prototype but the incidence of limited or no multiplication indicates that many ideas failed to pass the test of ordinary operating conditions. Most ideas focussed on improvement or maximisation of adhesive qualities. A notable exception was the work of Anatole Mallet where articulation was incidental to exploitation of compound steam. He was reportedly annoyed by modifications to produce large power units driven by simple expansion alone. In some respects, Anatole Mallet and Herbert Garratt were pursuing the same objective of more efficient energy conversion although through fundamentally different approaches. The variety of failed designs underlines the technical hurdles that faced efforts to increase the number of powered axles. Certain concepts are intrinsically difficult to execute as demonstrated by valiant yet failed attempts to create an effective two-wheel drive motorcycle. Within the Garratt locomotive’s career span, it is notable that the only viable mainline alternatives presented by the articulated community were Double and Single Fairlies, Modified Fairlies, Meyers and Kitson-Meyers. Only the Mallet was in contention among articulated and semi-articulated types after World War 1. The value of articulation however was endorsed by another breed whereby the Shay, Climax and Heisler types proved capable of hauling substantial loads over uneven or rudimentary trackwork, albeit only at slow speeds. The Garratt differed in one key respect from virtually every entry on the list as it was essentially a successful exercise in maximised boiler efficiency. Adoption of articulation that exploited two perfectly conventional rigid-framed power bogies was the means rather than the end.

314

Appendices

315

Beyer-Garratt

316

Appendices

Appendix B : Leading commercial UK steam locomotive builders

part from the railway companies’ own workshops, a large number of independent engineering companies manufactured steam locomotives from the earliest days of steam. Some produced component parts while many built complete engines. Numerous concerns were short-lived, there being a high corporate casualty rate through financial failure, company takeovers, inability to modernise, transfer to other engineering activities etc. Listed here are the main UK manufacturers active in the 20th Century. Two were formed through mergers (North British and R. Stephenson & Hawthorn). Two (Armstrong Whitworth and Beardmore) entered and withdrew from the market in the inter-war years. It is notable that five long-established names ceased manufacture altogether in the 1920s/ 30s. By 1960, only three builders remained and their involvement in steam production would soon cease.

317

Beyer-Garratt

Appendix C : Garratt locomotives built by other manufacturers

ith completion of the original agreement between Herbert Garratt and Beyer Peacock, patents were registered in several countries as described in Chapter 1 and the following companies were authorised to build under licence: Baldwin Locomotive Co, Pennsylvania, USA; Henschel & Sohn, Cassel, Germany; Société Saint Léonard, Liége, Belgium. Another important licencing agreement entered later concerned Société Franco-Belge, Raismes, Valenciennes, France apparently after a reorganisation in 1927 that saw a corporate split between French and Belgian interests. These arrangements contained certain geographic restrictions. For example, Saint Léonard had exclusive rights to supply railways in the Belgian Congo and Franco-Belge to French possessions in Africa. In the early years Saint Léonard focussed on narrowgauge engines for bush tramway-type operations, a market sector peripheral to BP’s main objectives. While the original UK patent was extant, BP strictly exercised their rights and refused construction consent to any party except those described above. Prior to UK patent expiry at the start of 1928, the only case of unapproved construction was a pair of 4-6-0+0-6-4s by Armstrong Whitworth for FC Pacifico, Colombia in 1924. A BP official inspected these locomotives in Newcastle-upon-Tyne upon completion following which AW admitted infringement and agreed not to build any more prior to patent expiry. AW supplied two 2-6-2+2-6-2s to Great Western Railway of Brazil in 1929 which were based on Class GC supplied to South Africa, and presumably BP was suitably remunerated. By the mid-1920s, competitors were fully aware of the Garratt’s potential and of the impending expiry of the original patents (most importantly those registered in UK and Germany). Judging by the dates it would seem that South African Railways had started their collaboration with German builders as design and construction was under way in advance of the expiry dates, thus accounting for the flurry of deliveries in 1927-9. The broader implications of SAR’s practices are discussed in Chapter 5. The Garratt’s design simplicity provided incentive for others to enter this specialised sector and BP’s post-1928 protection relied on its reputation for quality, its accumulated experience, and its policy of patenting new innovations. The greatest threat was presented by collaboration between competitors and operators, as with Kenya Uganda Railway’s purchase of ten 4-8-2+2-8-4s (Nos. 67-76 EAR Nos. 520110) from North British Locomotive Co in 1931. Although the full details remain unclear, KUR might have short-sightedly risked damage to its commercial relationship with the market leader in Garratt design and construction. In the event, differences seemed to have resolved as KUR and its successor later re-affirmed loyalty to BP.

For much of the 1930s, BP and commercial manufacturers generally were mainly concerned with survival while any further promotional efforts by German manufacturers in South Africa would have been stymied by the CME’s antipathy towards articulated power. By the time this policy changed towards the end of the decade, the attention of German heavy industry was focussed elsewhere. Western Australia Government Railway’s construction of Class Msa in 1930 apparently breached no agreements and presumably relied on its existing BP-built engines as templates. Local accounts of the genesis of the Australian Standard Garratt assert that the Commonwealth Land Transport Board did approach BP for help without success. This contradicts reports that the ASG project’s difficulties stemmed in part the CLTB’s determination to avoid paying royalties. Absence of help from BP probably reflected the enormous demands then imposed on Gorton and the practical difficulties in providing substantive support to an exercise discrete to distant Australia during wartime. Three railway workshops and a private contractor built the ASGs with over 100 sub-contractors engaged in supplying components. BP was concerned that the ASG’s unfortunate history might militate against the type’s generic reputation and thus damage post-war sales prospects but these fears proved ill-founded. The ASG project and the WAGR’s ten locomotives of 1930 were the only cases where railway operators built Garratts for their own use. Post-war surge in demand exceeded BP’s production capacity while recognition of the finite nature of long term prospects for steam locomotive sales encouraged licencing arrangements with Henschel and Franco-Belge. The agreement with North British specified non-competition terms which proved unnecessary with the Scottish company’s closure in 1962. The only overt breach in the 1950s was Krupp’s supply of six Garratts to Luanda Railway. In summary, Beyer Peacock’s strategy to protect its intellectual property rights was well prepared in theory and effective in practice.

318

Appendices

319

Beyer-Garratt

320

Appendices

Two views of Central of Aragon Railway 4-6-2+2-6-4 No. 105 (as RENFE No. 462.0405) at Valencia Alameda Motive Power depot on 5 July 1963. Introduced in 1931, built by Euskalduna (works No. 195), these handsome doublePacifics with their 5’ 9” driving wheels were the pride of the C of A fleet. With a maximum axle loading of 15 tons, they were designed to haul 300-ton passenger expresses at speeds up to 62 mph on the level and 24.5 mph on gradients of 1 in 46 and curves of 300-metre radius. They worked for ten years from their Valencia base. Six in total, they were the only European Garratts dedicated to passenger duties. Following nationalisation, they also worked BarcelonaSeville services between Valencia and Tarragona until replaced by diesels on both routes in 1966/ 7. They were so highly regarded that they were then employed on freight trains from Valencia to La Encina, a route that included 74 kilometres of continuous incline as steep as 1 in 75. Following eventual retirement, one member was saved for preservation. Peter Gray PG 3206/7.

321

Beyer-Garratt

Also in 1931, Central of Aragon Railway ordered six 2-8-2+2-8-2 Garratts from Babcock & Wilcox (works Nos 402-7) for freight work. They were another long-lived design and sufficiently successful for RENFE to approach Beyer Peacock for another ten about 1959. Unfortunately Gorton Foundry no longer had the manufacturing capacity so they were built by Babcock & Wilcox and delivered in 1960/ 1. They worked the same routes as their double-Pacific companions and were particularly effective on the climb to La Encina. These were the last steam locomotives built for general service in Spain and possibly the last for this purpose in Europe. These two views show No. 282.0430 at Valencia Alameda Motive Power Depot on 5 July 1963. This locomotive was the last of the class to enter service. Peter Gray PG 3212/ 3

322

In 1956, Henschel sold five 4-8-2+2-8-4s (works Nos. 28642-6) to Moçambique Railways. Numbered 971-5, they were the last new locomotives delivered to that system (as opposed to second-hand 2-8-2+2-8-2 SHEG-type locomotives acquired from Rhodesian and Congo Ocean railways). They were enlargements of twelve Garratts of similar wheel arrangement supplied by Haine St Pierre in 1956 but with many design details similar to South African Railways Class GMA/ M. This unidentified member of the class is believed to be on shed at Beira. GH Taylor

Appendices

323

Beyer-Garratt

South African Railways 4-8-2+2-8-4 Class GMAM No. 4112 is preserved in static condition at Summerlee Heritage Park, Coatbridge, Scotland. Built by North British Locomotive Co (works No. 27770) in 1956, this locomotive was undergoing cosmetic restoration on 25 November 2022. Even a scrape down and repaint is a major undertaking for a machine of this size. Michael Doolan 123135/ 123207

324

Appendices

Beyer Peacock works plate No. 7434 affixed to Queensland Government Railways ‘Garratt’ Class No. 1091, construction of which was sub-contracted to Société Franco-Belge. Simon Colbeck Collection.

Subject to Order No. 11181, Beyer Peacock works plate No. 7768 affixed to South African Railways Class GMA/M No. 4102, construction of which was sub-contracted to North British Locomotive Co. Simon Colbeck Collection.

This was the style of works plate affixed to the final batch of thirty Class GMA/M supplied by Henschel & Sohn to South African Railways in 1958. These engines were Henschel Works Nos. 29600-29 and SAR running Nos. 4141-70 but the plates made no mention of either identity. Nevertheless the terminology makes clear BP’s determination to preserve its proprietorial rights to the end. The running number for this locomotive was 4166. Simon Colbeck Collection.

325

Beyer-Garratt

Appendix D : Summary of Garratts built at Gorton Foundary

ocomotives are listed under four-, six-, and eightcoupled categories. They are detailed by gauge, wheel arrangement, works numbers, number actually constructed, year that the first of each type/ batch was built, and the operator’s identity. Only those locomotives built at Gorton and delivered in complete form are included so totals may differ from other sources. Locomotives excluded from the list: -

New South Wales Government Railway Class AD-60 delivered in semi-assembled/partially complete component form [8] Rhodesian Railways Class 15A sub-contracted to Franco Franco-Belge [10] South African Railways Class GMA/M built by Henschel [55] and North British [32]

326

South African Railways Class GO, a BP design but 25 all built by Henschel [25] South African Railways Class NG-G12 built under licence by Franco-Belge {2} South African Railways Class NG-G16 built under licence by Cockerill {4} STALIG-derived 4-8-2+2-8-4s built by Franco-Belge under licence and supplied to: East African Railways [12] Queensland Government Railway [20]; Franco-Belge for Railway [20] South Australian Railways [10] STALIG-derived 4-8-2+2-8-4s built by Henschel under licence and supplied by Great Western Railway of Brazil [6]

Appendices

327

Beyer-Garratt

328

Appendices

329

Beyer-Garratt

330

Appendices

Appendix E : Reports by C Williams on SAR Class GB No.1650 MEMORANDUM FOR SUPERINTENDENT [MECHANICAL) CLASS GB GARRATT LOCOMOTIVE – dated 2 September 1922

§ Class GB and 4-8-0 7th Class both had 3’ 6¾” driving wheels.

Yesterday morning I travelled on the footplate of above engine to Umbogintwini; the engine is still in first class order. The engine flanges have hardly commenced to wear, the bogie flanges are about half way. The engine is riding very solidly and the side play and the small amount of pivot wear does not seem to have affected the good riding qualities that this engine had from when it was first put into service. We went up Umbogintwini bank in 40% [cut-off?]. We had eight coaches on which is a full 7th class load.

MEMORANDUM FOR SUPERINTENDENT [MECHANICAL) CLASS GB (NO. 1650) GARRATT LOCOMOTIVE – dated 4 December 1922

Driver Taylor tells me that he has not yet finished his first box of sand, the sand in the boxes being what was put in over a year ago. He also tells me that unlike the Dubs A and 7th classes, no clinker forms in the [fire] box. Considering this engine burns the same coal as these other classes this is additional proof of the value of the deep box and the better combustion taking place. Up to the present no delay docket has been handed to driver Taylor by the guard and I understand not a single minute has yet been booked against the engine.

The pivot appears to me to have worn about 1/32”, but this can hardly have effect in running and I think will practically remain at this until it goes into the shops. To date the engine has run approximately 32,000 miles and I see no reason why another years work should not be obtained from the engine. I am still of the opinion that we have never yet had an engine more eminently suitable for branch line work than the Garratt locomotive.

On December 1st I made an inspection of engine No. 1650, the Garratt working on the South Coast line, and also rode on the footplate to Umbogintwini. This engine is still in first class order although it will have run over 40,000 miles at the end of this month. Driver Taylor reckons that the engine will run over 60,000 miles before general overhaul is necessary. The average mileage run by the 7th Class [rigid-framed 4-8-0] is about 33,000. The engine is now riding as well as when it was first put into service as the crown bearings of the carrying wheels which had worn have been renewed. I understand that this engine has been very light on repairs and if anything is an improvement on the 7th Class in this respect. Engine 1650 was first put into service on June 8th 1921 so has therefore been running 18 months. The engine has been running the 5.9 pm fast passenger ex-Durban for over 16 months with unfailing regularity and I understand that not a single minute has been booked against this engine during the period. The enginemen as well as the engine are to be complimented on this fine performance. It would seem that this type of engine is ideal for such Branch line work and the introduction of an enlarged engine of this kind, say with 4’ 0” diameter coupled wheels, should effect great economies and solve the problem of dealing with the heavy passenger traffic without going to the expense of strengthening permanent way and bridges. It is interesting to compare the leading features of the 7th Class engine with that of the Garratt as it demonstrates more clearly the overall efficiency of the Garratt engine. The Garratt can maintain 40 mph on the level comfortably and does not give one the impression of being strained, and the ten mile coal consumption of the engine is lower than the 7th. It is less severe on the track by virtue of its six coupled engines and lighter axle load.

Coming back on the Dubs A engine I could not help being impressed with the high speed these small wheeled engines § are steaming at and it is no wonder that some four months None of the flanges of the wheels of the Garratt have yet work at such pressure knocks the engine to pieces. The very been turned. vitals of the machine seem to groan. I think every endeavour should be made to get the largest wheels possible in any The engine flanges have hardly worn at all. future Garratt locomotive that may be ordered compatible The performance as a whole seems to be highly satisfactory. with the tractive effort desired. Signed C. Williams Signed C. Williams Durban Durban 2 September 1922 4 December 1922 331

Beyer-Garratt

Appendix F : Letter dated 9 July 1945 from Bengal & Assam Railway

The file copy of this letter is too damaged and faded for reproduction; this is the text verbatim: From:

The Chief Mechanical Engineer, Bengal & Assam Railway, Calcutta

To:

Messrs Beyer Peacock & Co Ltd, London SW1

Subject: Burma Garratt Locomotives Dear Sirs, I should like to place on record my appreciation of the work done by your Beyer Garratt Locomotives during a very critical phase in the history of this Railway. These engines operated on the section Akhara to Lumding during 1944 & 45, which you know is contiguous to the Eastern Frontier of India, and which the Japanese attempted to cut in the early part of 1944, and very nearly succeeded in their efforts. 2. The 2-8-0+0-8-2 Garratts worked heavy petrol and stone trains regularly between Akhaura and Badarpur a section of line containing gradients of 1 in 150. The length of these trains was governed by the length of the station loops, rather than by the tractive effort of the engines, but in spite of this, they showed an economy in coal consumption of over 40 per cent when compared with the standard class of engine employed on similar service. 3. The 2-8-2+2-8-2 Garratts were employed on regular service between Badarpur & Lumding, a section which is mountainous in character with long grades of 1 in 60 and eleven miles of I in 37, and having uncompensated curves of 13 degrees. The military situation at the time demanded increased lifts over this section since the greater portion of the existing class of power could take 230 tons only behind the drawbar. Your 2-8-2+2-8-2 Garratts provided the answer and with them the average lift was stepped up to 420 tons. Markedly lower coal consumption was achieved at the same time, as the Garratts burned only 60 per cent of the coal per 1000 Gross Ton miles consumed by the 4-8-0 class previously used on that service. 4. These Garratts have proved mechanically reliable and have resulted in reduced engine maintenance, The footplate staff like them because they can take a considerable amount of punishment without attendant failures. The detail design is very good and the braking system is the only satisfactory one we have had on the hill section up to date. 5. It can truly be stated that without these engines we would have been unable to handle the inflated military traffic which passed over that section of the Railway, therefore contributing to the success of the 14th Army in Burma. Yours faithfully, CHIEF MECHANICAL ENGINEER

332

Appendices

Appendix G : Locomotive names

elatively few Garratts were graced with names, often for only parts of their working careers e.g. EAR classes 57/58/60 early on, and Rhodesian 15th/20th classes in their final years. These notes should be regarded as indicative only. Arakan Light Railway, Burma: Two locomotives which carried the names of the railway’s termini. A nameplate appears on the cabside of ALR No. 1 in an official photograph which shows that they were fitted at Gorton Foundry before delivery.

East African Railways, formerly Kenya Uganda Railway: Class EC/ EC1 later 50/ 51: Names had local significance but it is uncertain to what they precisely referred. For example, No. 5006 Meru could mean a town, a county, or a local tribal name. Also No. 5008 Nandi meant a range of hills or a local language. In such cases, names might have been locally important for reasons other than those that are immediately obvious. Class EC3 later 57: Similar principles and resultant possible ambiguity applied to names carried by this class Class 59: Mainly named after mountains in East Africa but some titles also refer to regions/ areas. Class 60: When new, the names of colonial dignitaries were affixed but unsurprisingly removed following the gaining of independence. No. 6001 was renamed Uhuru (Swahili for ’freedom’) although some records indicate that this title was carried by No. 6026. Ferrocarril La Paz Antofagasta: Names refer to mountains and regions of Bolivia.

National Railways of Zimbabwe: Confined to 15th and 20th/ 20A classes, names were apparently allocated during the refurbishment programme although whether all selected were actually affixed is unknown. Local names for indigenous wildlife appear to have been used except predictably, No. 747 Jumbo. Nepal Government Railways: Names connected with a local deity. Nigerian Government Railways: All Garratts bore names, mainly of local ethnic/ tribal dignitaries plus some colonial officers. Changes occurred as with Shehu of Bornu carried by three locomotives and Emir of Bauchi (two). Dates are unrecorded and reasons are unclear for these and other changes. South African Railways: Informal nicknames and plates were applied to some SAR locomotives but the only official naming of a Garratt appears to have been Class GL No. 2351 Princess Alice in connection with a Royal visit. Tanganyika Railways: Names of towns and areas within Tanganyika. Trans-Zambesia Railway: Recognised prominent individuals in Portuguese history, two of whom had particular associations with Moçambique. UK industrial ‘Vivian” Class: The specific connection for the only named example of this type is unclear, although a Captain Vivian did serve as a director of Beyer Peacock. War Department No. 74240: A ‘one-off’ commemorative naming associated with the end of World War 2 in Europe.

333

Beyer-Garratt

334

Appendices

335

Beyer-Garratt

Bibliography

Author Abbott, Rowland A S Alexander, Colin & Siton, Alon Beale, Philip & Mitchell, Vic Bender, Henry E Jr Beyer Peacock & Co Ltd

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Title The Fairlie Locomotive Beyer, Peacock & Company of Manchester

Publisher David & Charles Locomotive Studies Amberley

Date 1970 2019

Sierra Leone Narrow Gauge Uintah Railway - The Gilsonite Route Beyer Peacock & Co Ltd and Associated Companies: The Second World War Articulated Locomotives of the World Kitson Meyer Articulated Locomotives Meyer Articulated Locomotives: The Definitive History C.B. Collett - A Competent Successor

Middleton Press Heimberger House

2004 1970

Self-published D. Bradford Barton Ltd Wyvern Publications

1945 1975 1985

A Trackside Publication The Oakwood Press

1997 2002

Locomotives of the GSR

Colourpoint Books

2008

The LMS Turbomotive from evolution to legacy Garratt Locomotives of the World The Mallet Locomotive Twilight of South African Steam Historical Locomotive Monographs No 1 LMS & LNER Garratts Railways of the Andes Steam in the Andes - A Pictorial Survey South American Steam Steam in Australia A History of W.A.G.R. Steam Locomotives Steam Locomotives of Rhodesia Railways Fowler Locomotives Some Contributions to Locomotive

Crécy Publishing Bracken Books David & Charles Locomotive Studies David & Charles

2016 1987 1974 1989

Wild Swan Publications Ltd Plateway Press D. Bradford Barton Ltd D. Bradford Barton Ltd ARHS NSW Division Sydney & Bradford Barton ARHS (Western Australian Division) Zimbabwe Publishing Co (Pvt) Ltd Ian Allan Ltd

1991 1963 1973 1974 1977 1984 1981 1981

Transactions of the Newcomen Society, Vol. 40

19678

The Transport Publishing Company Plateway Press

1982 2000

David & Charles

1971

Purnell & Sons (SA) (Pty) Ltd

1972

Purdom, DS Ramaer, R Rolt, LTC Stewart, WW Wiener, Lionel Yoder, JH & Wharen, GB

British Steam on the Pampas Steam Locomotives of East African Railways A Hunslet Hundred When Steam was King Articulated Engines Locomotive valves and valve gears

Self-published The New Zealand Railway and Locomotive Society (Otago Branch) Inc Goose and Son The New Zealand Railway and Locomotive Society Inc, Wellington The Burlington Press, Royston, Herts David & Charles David & Charles AH & AW Reed, Wellington, New Zealand Kalmach Publishing Co, Milwaukee, Wisconsin TEE Publishing

2014

Lowe, James W McClare, E J

Development by Beyer, Peacock & Co Beyer Peacock - locomotive builders to the world The Origins of the Garratt Locomotive Steam Locomotives of the South African Railways Volume 1: 1859-1910 Steam Locomotives of the South African Railways Railways Volume 2: 1910-1955 Beyer Peacock's Garratts - Articulated Locomotives Sent Worldwide Register of New Zealand Railways Steam Locomotives 1863-1971 British Steam Locomotive Builders The NZR Garratt Story

Periodicals

Beyer-Peacock Quarterly Review (The) Continental Modeller Locomotive (The) Railway Gazette (The) Railway Magazine (The) Railway Modeller Railway World

Binns, Donald Binns, Donald Binns, Donald & Koch, Günter Chacksfield, J.E. Clements, Jeremy & McMahon, Michael Clements, Jeremy & Robertson, Kevin Durrant, A E Durrant, A E Durrant, A E Essery, RJ & Toms, G. Fawcett, Brian Fawcett, Brian Finch, MHJ Gilbertson, Colin B Gunzburg, Leon Hamer, ED Haresnape, Brian Hills, R Hills, R F & Patrick D Hills, Richard L Holland, DF Holland, DF Lloyd, Joe Lloyd, W G

336

1974 1975 1978 1977 1974 1964 1970 1930 1917

Appendices

Index

Index Design features

Steam pipes & couplings

Bissel truck

100

Steam pipe ball joint

Blastpipe

30, 81, 82

Sturtevant blower

120

Blastpipe [double concentric]

Superheating

27, 28, 81, 82

Synchronisation

Timken roller bearings

150

- vacuum

Valve gear

- Westinghouse/ air

- Caprotti

37, 204

Brotan boiler

25, 26

- Gresley conjugated

34, 183

Cartazzi axle box

41, 207

- Lentz

Carrying wheels

40, 41

Brakes - mechanical

34, 35, 36, 136, 137, 142, 148, 163, 204

Coal pusher

- Poppet

Compound steam

27, 28

- Slide

Cylinders

33, 34

- Walschaerts

33, 34, 35, 37, 204

Expansion joint

Wheelbase

Fell system

Worthington feedwater heater

Events

169

Firebox - Belpaire

30, 31, 81

British Empire Exhibition 1924

103

- round-topped

British Emp Ex., B. Aires 1931

223

- water tube

Great London Exposition

9, 10

- Wootten

97, 106

Great Depression

20, 169, 190

Flaman speed recorder

112

Royal Commission, NZ 1924

182

Semmering locomotive competition

93, 314

- bar

Shildon Pageant (S & D centenary)

200

Frames - cast steel

World War 1

Fuel

17, 41, 92

General arrangement drawing

196

Giesl ejector

30, 156, 265, 269-271

Naphtha residue

Injector

81, 154

Oil

196

Langer spark arrester

187

Timber - eucalyptus

Locomotive length

Legal

Machine tools

Grouping

Mechanical stoker

45, 46

Lange & Livesay patent

Multi-cylinder

31, 34

Licensees -

Nicholson thermic syphon

- Baldwin

Pivot, power bogie

18, 39, 40

- Henschel

Porta Gas Prod, Comb. System

130, 131

- Société St Leonard [Liege]

16, 17

Power bogie

Patents {Beyer-owned}

15-18

Royalty income

17, 18

UK unemployment relief

Power reserve

13, 24

- Hadfield

36-38, 40, 153, 166

- Sterling

Locomotives, classes

Product demonstration

Alfred Country NG-G16 2-6-2+2-6-2

130, 131

Published data

Antofagasta& Chile 4-8-2+2-8-4

51, 60, 61, 197, 198,

Reversing gear

see power reverse

Road testing

Arakan [Flotilla ]

41, 46, 74, 90, 91

Rotary bunker

44, 45, 162, 163

Argentine North Eastern

37, 61, 134, 136-138,

222, 224, 225, 293

Saturated steam

27, 28

Schmidt superheater

27, 84

Argentine Transandine

42, 59

143, 146, 147

Standardisation

50, 51

Assam Bengal 2-6-2+2-6-2

143, 165-8, 264-6

337

Beyer-Garratt 2

Index (cont.) Locomotive, classes (cont.)

LNER U1

34, 37, 48, 52, 84, 160,

34, 35, 37, 46, 57, 77,

Luanda 4-8-2+2-8-4

51, 251, 259, 271-3

119, 197, 198, 202-6

Mauritius Govt. 2-8-0+0-8-2

197, 198, 218/ 9, 221/ 3

33, 35, 37, 48, 57, 66, 187,

Moçambique Rlys

197/ 8, 217-21, 229, 259

Mogyana 4-6-0+0-6-4

37, 60, 74, 87, 88

42, 43, 57, 72, 197, 198,

Nepal Govt. 2-6-2+2-6-2

51, 70, 143, 174, 175

221/ 2

New Cape Central Class G

51, 58, 62

B Aires Midland 4-6-2+2-6-4

37, 51, 143, 172, 173

New Zealand Govt Class G

27, 31, 34, 40, 45/ 6/ 8, 84,

B Aires Pacific 4-8-2+2-8-4

37, 197, 198, 223, 225, 226

Burma Rlys GAI & II, GC, GB, GE

40, 41, 46, 51, 74, 77, 110,

Australian Portland Cement

46, 47, 51, 143, 176

Bengal-Nagpur cls. N/ NM/ P Benguela eight-coupled B Aires Gt Southern 4-8-2+2-8-4

197-202

169, 180-195, 201, 239 Nigerian Govt cls 201/ 501

196-9, 247, 250, 251, 259, 264-6 Central Rly of Peru 2-8-2+2-8-2

31/ 2, 37, 71, 143, 175, 176, 197/ 8, 231/ 2

Nitrate Rlys (Chile), 2-8-2+2-8-2

60-2, 70, 108, 197, 206-8,

North Eastern (Brazil)

260,

47, 62, 70, 71, 197, 198,

231, 278

230/ 1 Ceylon Govt 2-4-0+0-4-2

136, 138, 139, 258

North West (India) 2-6-2+2-6-2

78, 108, 143/ 4, 169, 203

Ceylon Govt Class C1/ C1A

37/ 8, 68, 69, 134, 143

New South Wales class AD60

13/ 4, 23, 33, 42, 259, 263,

CF PLM, Algeria 4-6-2+2-6-4

45, 244

Cons. Main Reef Gold Mining

Ottoman 2-8-0+0-8-2

27, 197, 198, 217- 219

Cordoba Central 4-8-2+2-8-4

51, 57, 197/ 8, 227/ 8

Queensland Govt Rly 'Garratt'

51, 251, 250, 272-6, 325

Darjeeling 0-4-0+0-4-0

74, 77

Rhodesia Rlys -

Dorada double-pacifics

31, 143, 179

- 6-coupled [13th/ 14th & A/

Dundee Coal & Coke Ltd

278-281

15th & A]

East African Railways - Class EA

106-109, 188

- Class EB3

- classes 13th/ 50/ 51 (EC1)

36, 37, 38, 51, 57, 58, 108,

- classes 54/ 55/ 56/ - classes EC3/ 4 (57/ 58)

- 8-coupled [17th/ 18th/ 20th/ 20A]

69, 142/ 3,147-158, 228, 289292, 280, 297, 299 33, 42, 46, 65, 69, 153, 197/ 8, 228-230, 252, 258/ 9, 278, 280-4, 289-292, 297-9

197/ 8, 208-211

Rio Tinto 2-6-2+2-6-2

46, 198, 250/ 1, 253, 266,

São Paulo [Brazil]

288

- classes Q/ U/ V

36, 38, 40, 42, 51, 71,

- Double-prairie/ pacific class R1

197/8, 212-7, 253, 264-6, - classes 59/ 60

34/ 5, 37, 42, 51/ 2, 57/ 8,

46, 47, 51, 143, 170, 171 42, 74, 86-90, 163 31/ 2, 34/ 5, 37, 61, 143, 163-6, 185

293

Sierra Leone Development Corp

42, 51, 253, 259, 265-71,

Sierra Leone Govt

51, 197, 198, 234

278, 288, 292

- [6-coupled]

143, 157-160

Emu Bay 4-8-2+2-8-4

36/ 7, 51, 61, 197/ 8, 226/ 7

- [8-coupled]

31, 32, 139, 259, 284-287

Entre Rios 4-4-2+2-4-4

35-7, 134, 136-8, 143/ 6/ 7

South African - GA/ GB/ GC/ GD/ GE/ GG/ GK

Fell-Garratt

301. 302

Geared Garratt

301. 302

Garratt-Mallet

300-2

GWR of Brazil 4-8-2+2-8-4

51, 259, 294

32, 41, 48, 51, 58/9, 62, 95/ 6, 106, 110-9, 163, 185, 234, 260, 318, 331

- [large] GL/ GM

Guayaquil & Quito 2-6-2+2-6-2

143, 169, 170

Iranian State Rlys 4-8-2+2-8-4

196-198, 238-241

Kenya Uganda Railway

See East African Rlys

Leopoldina 2-4-2+2-4-2

31, 34-6, 134, 139-141, 258

Leopoldina 4-6-2+2-6-4

37, 48, 51, 60, 67, 143, 172-4

LMS 2-6-0+0-6-2

37, 41, 48, 50, 57, 66, 143,

33, 65, 69, 106, 110, 119124, 203, 234, 278, 295, 300, 310

- GEA/ GMA/ GMAM/ GO

123, 256, 259-264, 279, 28890, 294,/5, 300, 324/5 - [2' 0" gauge] NG-G 11/ 12/ 16

143, 160-3, 185

31, 33, 43, 46, 57, 70, 112,

31, 95, 110, 125-139, 258, 289, 296

338

Appendices 3

Index (cont.) Locos, classes (cont.)

Hagans

South African Industrial

Indian Rlys proposal

305, 306

Kitson-Meyer

13/ 5/ 9, 59, 61, 74/ 6, 92-94,

- Dundee Coal / Vreiheid Coal

51, 131, 132, 170

South Australian Govt.

51, 251, 259, 284-286

STALIG

29, 31, 46, 50, 57, 70

Krupp, Essen 2-10-2

244

Sudan 4-6-4+4-6-4

37, 41/ 2, 51, 58, 142/ 3,

LMS Stanier 8F

244

148, 153, 177-179, 213

Meyer

13, 56, 92/ 4, 103, 314

36/ 7, 47, 51, 58, 197,

Midland Rly 0-10-0 'Big Bertha'

202,

231- 3, 250

New Zealand Railways

17, 27, 34, 48, 74-7, 79,

- Class Ab 4-6-2

186, 188, 194, 195

83-7, 95, 182/ 3, 185, 188

- Class G 4-6-2 [rebuild]

192, 194, 195

143, 169-171

- Class K 4-8-4

192,

Tanganyika - class GA Tasmanian Govt. cls K1/ L/ M Transandine 2-6-2+2-6-2

99, 101, 123,147, 182, 314

Trans Zambesia 2-6-2+2-6-2

51, 58, 142-4

- Class X 4-8-2

181, 183

USSR Railways Garratt

32, 197/ 8, 234-238, 267

Queensland Garratt [prop'd]

308, 309

Victorian Govt Railways

41, 51, 143, 146-148

Reid-MacLeod Steam Turbine

102-4

Vivian Garratt UK

56, 67, 134/ 5

Reid-Ramsay Steam-Turbine

War Department/ WD Garratts

31, 48, 51, 70, 198, 206,

Electric

101

215, 233, 242, 245-256

Shay

96, 169

- BP Nos 7112-21 2-8-0+0-8-2

245-247, 253

Single-Fairlie

28, 314

- BP Nos 7122-35 2-8-2+2-8-2

247-249, 253

Sharp singles

- BP Nos 7140-59 STALIG

248--253, 259

Southern [UK] [proposed]

305

- BP Nos 7057-74 SHEG

252-254, 258

Steam Rail Motor

24, 25

- BP Nos 7075-24 SHEG

252-256

Union-Garratt

101, 104-6, 117/ 8

West Aust, classes M/ Ms/ Msa

30, 43, 74, 78-82, 84, 92,

Union Pacific Challenger

27,

256, 318

Zambia National Railways

282-284

212

Manufacturers American Locomotive Co

55, 93

Algerian State Double-pacific

244

Andrew Barclay & Sons

314

Antofagasta 4-6-4+4-6-4 [prop'd]

305, 306

Anglo Persian Oil Company

196, 239, 241

Yunan Rly, China

Locomotive types, other

Australian Standard Garratt

83, 84, 256, 318

Armstrong Whitworth

62, 249, 314, 318

Camelback

Avonside Engine Co.

301, 314

Crane tanks

Automatic Stoker Co

187

Double-Fairlie

13/ 5, 24, 92/ 3, 101/ 3,

Babcock & Wilcox

311, 322

198, 314

Baldwin Locomotive Works

55, 199, 318

East African 4-8-4+4-8-4 [prop'd]

306-309

Berilinau Maschinenfabrik

Fairlie

13, 15, 24, 28, 56, 314

Britsh Mannesmann Tube Co

Fairlie - Modified

40, 101-106, 117/ 8, 182/ 3,

Cammell-Laird & Co

182

215,

Charles McNeil & Co

Fell Garratt [proposal]

301, 302

Cockerill

128, 129

Garratt for Taranaki, NZ [prop'd]

304

Dübs & Co

12, 93, 314

Garratt, geared [proposed]

303,304

Dunn's Locomotive Works

124, 260

Garratt-Mallet [proposed]

300-302

Euskalduna

321, 322

Great Central [8A]

26, 41, 74, 200

Fenton, Murray & Jackson

Great Western [UK] [prop'd]

305

Foges Usine et Fonderies

311

339

Beyer-Garratt 4

Index (cont.) Manufacturers (cont.)

Organisations

Franco-Belge

44, 45, 66, 128, 148. 259, 269,

Aberdeen University

271, 274, 276-8, 311/ 2/ 8

Beyer Laboratories

General Steel Casting Corpn

279

Brymbo Iron & Steel Co

Haine-St Pierre

312

Chiappini Bros

Hanomag

63, 105, 117, 129

Crown Agents

166, 221

Hawthorn Leslie & Co

314

Durban Technical Institute

Henschel

40, 51, 63, 104, 105, 117, 259,

Inst. of Traction R'truction, USSR

239

261, 312, 318, 322/ 3, 325

Institution of Mech. Engineers

9, 73

Liberal Party

Hohenzollern Hudswell Clarke

314

Loco Manufacturers Assoc

Hunslet

314

Manchester Inst. of Technology

Hunslet Taylor

128, 129, 311

Museum of Science+Technology

Kerr Stuart

314

Owen's College, Manchester

Kitson & Co

13, 59, 76, 182, 314

Science Museum

Krupp

63, 105, 117, 199, 311

Personalities

Linke Hoffman

105, 117

Alcock, E

15, 16, 28

Maffei

63, 105, 117

Angus PR

189

Manning Wardle

134, 314

Armstrong, Joseph

Maschinen Christian Hagans

Barstow, JAT. Lt Col

242

Nasmyth Wilson

314

Beyer, Charles F

6, 8, 9

Neilson Reid & Co

301, 314

Birney, Colonel

North British Locomotive Co

40, 63, 92, 101-4, 107, 117,

Brassey, Thomas

9 263

182, 198, 215, 259, 261, 311,

Bulleid Oliver

312/ 4/ 88, 324

Coates, JG

182

Porter

206

Collett, CB

73, 239

Richard Garrett Eng. Works

Collins, Col FR

63, 105, 106, 120

Robert Stephenson & Co

107-109, 188, 314

Crane, Maurice

245 11

Sharp, Bros

Dawson, George

Sharp, Roberts

Day, WAJ

121

Sharp Stewart

7, 76, 93, 314

Deeble, WR

Société St Leonard, Liege

58, 66, 75, 318

Drummond, Peter

Standard Stoker Co

Durrant, AE

5, 35

Superheater Co

27, 182

Fairlie, Robert

Swiss Locomotive Works

Farringdon. Lord

Tsumeb Corp.

129, 130

Fay, Sir Sam

19, 20, 67, 182,

Vacuum Brake Co

Vulcan Foundry

92, 198, 314

Gard, RJ

192

WR Bagnall

314

Garratt, Colin

Wiiliam Beardmore

314

Garratt, HW

6, 11-18, 24, 41,

William Doxford's Eng. Works

William Peckett & Sons

135

Garratt, Mrs HW

17, 18

Wilson, EB & Co

Geach, Charles

Yorkshire Engine Co.

108, 206

Gemmell [SAR officer]

183, 194/ 9, 221

91, 101, 314/ 8

Military factors

Gooch, Daniel

7, 9

14th Army

246, 247

Gresley, Nigel

200 147

Munition Production

242

Grey, EH

Operation Torch

244

Hadfield, James

47, 48, 311

World War 2 munitions

256, 257

Hall, FC

239

340

Appendices 5

Index (cont.) Personalities (cont.) Hamilton, Duke of

Vivian, Hugh Capt

242

Wakefield, W

78, 95, 100, 113, 125

Harvey, RJ

182, 183

Watermeyer, TH

Hendrie, David

19, 93-101, 105, 125

Watson, AG

73, 100/ 6, 117/ 8, 121

Hiley, EH

180, 181

Webb, William

Hillman, CR

Welsh, R

20, 21

Hills, Dr RF

5, 28

Wiener, Prof. Lionel

314

Hoy, Henry A

15, 101

Williams, CR

18-20, 53, 57-67, 76, 88,

Hoy, Sir William [SAR]

100

95-101, 105, 108, 110,

Hume, ES

76, 79

114, 126/ 7, 228, 242, 331

Humm, Robert

236

Jackson, Sir FS,

242

Wilmot, Harold

20, 21, 73, 242, 246, 312

Jackson, Samuel Jefferson, T

15, 20/ 1, 44-8, 242

Advantages Articulated Locos

19, 182

206

A Hunslet Hundred

15,

Johnson, Ralph P

310

B Peacock book, World War 2

242

Kay, John

Daily Telegraph, The

Publications

Kirby, Mr (Darjeeling)

GWR Magazine

239

Kirtley, Matthew

Locomotive, The

Lang, Herman L

Railway Gazette, The

Lawson, C

99, 100

Railway Magazine, The

236

Locke, Joseph

Railways of the Andes

5, 9, 95

Railways, British & Irish

231

Lloyd, Joe Lynde, GS

182, 185, 187

Belfast & County Down

54, 55

Mallet. Anatole

314

Big Four

311

McDonald, Colonel

British Railways

311

McConnell, George

Danube & Black Sea

McDonnell, Alexander

Dublin & South Eastern

McMullen, DJ

246

Edinburgh & Glasgow

More, JR

63, 65, 114

Festiniog

Nock, OS

Glasgow & Greenock

Park, JC

Grand Junction

Patrick, D

5, 28

Great Central

8/ 9, 19, 20/ 6, 184, 199

Peacock, Richard

7, 8, 11

Great India Peninsular

56, 108

Raven, Sir Vincent

182

Great Northern Ireland

Reid, Hugh

101

Great Southern (Ireland)

Riddles, Robert

239

Great Southern & Western

55, 56

Roberts, Richard

6, 55

Great Western

7, 9, 14, 239, 241, 312

Robertson, Henry

8, 11, 242

Highland

93 15, 54

Robertson, Kevin

Lancashire & Yorkshire

Robinson, J G

Leeds & Selby

Rogerson, AC

Liverpool & Manchester

Rolt, LTC

London Brighton & South Coast

25, 54

Sells, Maj. MP

153, 154, 228

LMS/ LM Region

202

Sharp, John

London & North Eastern

28, 29, 184 9

Stephenson, Robert

London & North Western

Stewart, WW

180

London & South Western

11, 19

Sturrock, Archibald

Manchester Sheffield & Lincs

8, 9

Vauclain, Samuel

310

Metropolitan

341

Beyer-Garratt

Index (cont.) Railways, British & Irish (cont.) Midland & South Western Junc

Buenos Aires Gt. Southern 20

61, 72

Buenos Aires Provincial

Central Argentine

11, 61 61

North Staffordshire

Chilean State

North London

Cuban Central

Sheffield, Ashton & Manchester

Ferrocarril del Colombia

249

Sligo Leitrim & Northern Counties

55, 311

Inter-Oceanic Mexico

15, 60

Southern

312

Jamaica Railway Corp.

Stockton & Darlington

Lima

Ulster Transport Authority

Meridiano Quinte

Sorocabana

Railways/ operators (other) - Africa

Southern of Peru

Algerian State

244

Uintah

Benguela

United of Havana

252

- Asia

24, 25

Caminho de Ferro da Beira Cape Govt.

93, 103, 123

Indian State

250

Central South African

94, 99

Japanese Govt (Nippon)

13, 14

C.F. Congo Ocean

75, 252

South Manchuria

C.F. du Katanga

Trans-Caucasian

C.F. Vicinaux du Mayumabe

75,

War Dept. India

312

- Australasia

166, 249, 250

Katanga Rlys

317

Lagos Govt

Commonwealth Land Trans. Bd

Luanda

311

Mt. Lyell Mining & Railway Co.

Moçambique Rlys

149, 252, 312, 314

Wellington & Manawatu

185, 186

Natal Government

18, 94, 130

- Europe

New Cape Central

115, 127,

Central of Aragon

311, 318, 319

Mexican

Portuguese State

South Eastern of Portugal

9, 10

Argentine State

61, 62

Tudela & Bilbao

- Americas Arica, Chile

Transport, other

Barranquilla Rly, Colombia

Ships

11, 58, 185

Buenos Aires Western

Steam lorry (lurry)

342

Appendices

Garratts purchased from SAR for industrial service worked hard for their new owners who often decked them out in elaborate liveries, in contrast to the plain unlined black carried by much of the genre in South Africa and elsewhere. This is a Class GEA (SAR number unidentified) in its second career as Vryheid Coronation Colliery No. 6. The locomotive is re-starting from a photographic stop halfway along the 10 kilometre route from the colliery to the SAR exchange sidings at Hlobane, Natal on 30 July 1982. That day was the first occasion on which the photographer drove a steam engine and this was his charge. Nothing like starting with the best to learn the art! Nicolas Trudgian

343

East African Railways Class 59 No. 5908 Mount Loolmalasin was standing at Mombasa depot on 2 October 1967. At that date all MombasaNairobi services were dominated by this class; four years later, diesel power had taken over passenger traffic but freight remained in the capable hands of these giants. Their rakish lines tended to disguise their size from certain angles but in this instance, there is little doubt about their immense proportions.

Beyer-Garratt

344

The 4-6-4+4-6-4s of Rhodesian Railways classes 15th/ 15A were successful, versatile and highly regarded by both footplate and maintenance personnel. They were extremely effective working long distance passenger and freight services but on 29 July 1993, 15th Class No. 380 was reduced to shunting passenger stock at Bulawayo. John Tolson

Appendices

345

Tailpiece

Beyer-Garratt

346