|
|
Post by Hutch on Oct 16, 2008 19:01:43 GMT
After a chance mention in a 1908 Railway Magazine, I located a copy of the 1901 (Volume 8) single page article on the subject complete with manufacturer’s drawing of "Fowler’s Ghost" – a complete engineering disaster and with only one known photograph of it still in existence. The anonymous article can be found here . However, there is a problem – one of the illustrations is not the real Ghost. First is the engineering drawing, purportedly from Robert Stevenson’s Engineers – builders of the engine that was reproduced in the Railway Magazine below, a 2-2-2 of unusual form and fitting of the description of an oddball.  The other is the photograph carried on this London Transport Museum website. It is linked to below – [administrators: please remove if you are uncomfortable with this – it is referenced above]  It is quite obvious though that these are not the same locomotive. The museum photo is of a quite conventional broad gauge 2-4-0 totally unlike the one illustrated in the Railway Magazine. I wonder who is right as the truth was quickly buried after the debacle by the Metropolitan Railway. Electricity finally triumphed of course and all of these left-field solutions went away – interesting how the RM mentions that the "Ghost" might have ended its days in some sort of Victorian "Freak-show" run by a certain Mr Boulton – I wonder if any futher trace of it could ever be found? |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Oct 16, 2008 19:08:36 GMT
The bottom photograph has been claimed to be 'Fowlers Ghost', when it quite patently is not, ever since 'The Last Drop' was published (1971) as a commemoration of the last working steam trains on the combine.
If more proof positive were needed that the bottom photograph was an ordinary engine, it seems to be blowing off in the picture, which 'Fowlers Ghost' failed so miserably in achieving! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutch on Oct 16, 2008 19:25:04 GMT
Is the following the book to which you refer?
Day, John R. & Fenton, William (1971) Last drop : the steam age on the underground from 1863 to 1971, London : London Transport, ISBN 0-85329-014-8
If so, what did they have to say on the subject?
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Oct 16, 2008 20:40:12 GMT
It is indeed.
The lower picture in your OP appears on the back cover, with the caption 'Fowler's handsome, but unsuccessful, broad-guage 'Ghost' on a special trip near Edgware Road in 1862'.
The only other mention inside is:
'The engineer, John Fowler, decided to solve the problem of fumes and smoke in the tunnels by using steam generated in the locomotive bioler by firebrick previously brought to white heat. The handsome engine he designed was built by Robert Stephenson & Co., but it failed to pass its trials. Though sold and eventually scrapped, it has gone down in railway history as 'Fowler's Ghost' - possibly the Underground's best remebered locomotive.
In the remarks at the rear, it claims to be a 2-4-0 tender, built in 1861 by RS&Co, never used in passenger service.Sold in 1865 to Isaac Watt Boulton and eventually resold to Beyer,Peacock for scrapping.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Oct 16, 2008 20:50:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutch on Oct 16, 2008 21:05:04 GMT
Me thinks there is some Victorian spin here.
The dimensions given in the 1901 article do not tally with (v. short tube lengths) the museum photograph which I suspect is of a 'standard' GWR locomotive - any GWR experts out there?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2008 14:36:01 GMT
I'll have a look when I can find the right book. It could be that the original was 'rebuilt' by the GWR, a term that in the nineteenth century could mean renewing everything from the railhead upwards! The Dean 3521 class locos were a case in point. They began life as broad guage 0-4-2 tank locos. Proved to be dangerously unstable so were rebuilt as 0-4-4 tanks. They were no better and two derailed with fatal consequences in Cornwall. Deans solution was to turn them around and make them into standard guage 4-4-0 tender locos. The boiler wheels and motion were used again but with new frames, coupling rods and everything else ithe question could be asked just how much was 'original'. It wasn't just the GWR either. I have read a description of the rebuilding process of the 'Royal Scots' as 'having their cabs jacked up and new locomotives put underneath!' These days on the national rail network a loco just has to be a different colour and it warrants a new sub-class....
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Oct 17, 2008 16:48:27 GMT
Please don't think that I'm a GWR <spit> expert, but my money is on the GWR broad guage engine being one of this lot: www.steamindex.com/locotype/broadgg.htmWhen the necessity arose for locomotives to work the Metropolitan Railway, Gooch experimented with an engine in which steam had been raised to blowing-off pressure. The fire was then dropped, and the engine, presumably light and without stops, was found to be able to run nine miles. Not a very promising prospect, a view with which Gooch seems to have agreed. The locomotives he then designed were to be his last - 2-4-0 side-tank engines, the first in the country to be fitted with condensing equipment, which consisted of two watertanks, one fitted below the boiler and the other beneath the cab. They were unusual also in that they had outside cylinders, in order to create space inside the frames for the condensing tanks. Six were built by Vulcan Foundry in 1862, and six more came from Kitson's of Leeds. The final ten were built at Swindon. They continued to haul GWR services on the 'Met' until the broad gauge rail was removed in 1869, but for the reasons already mentioned were not a great success. When the need for the condensers had gone, they were removed from most of them: five were converted into tender engines and all were withdrawn within five years from 1871. Their boilers were used for stationary work, one of them, from Lily, going for use on the SS Great Eastern. (note the reference to something akin to Fowler's Ghost) Something from 'The Engineer': 1895 History of the Met. Part 1, page 53, drawing of a 'Long Charley' in here. Part 2By elimination the engine is not a Sir Watkin class, but could be a Metropolitan 2-4-0T as converted to tender working. Using my google-fu I can come up with a reference to the following: - Metropolitan Tank Engine Mogul A newly discovered photograph of one of the GWR 2-4-0Ts used between Paddington and Farringdon Street. 50 Autumn (Sept) 2003
- Farringdon Street Station The track plan of the Metropolitan Railway terminus as it was in 1863. 50 Autumn (Sept) 2003
(50 Autumn (Sept) 2003) presumably being a reference to issue 50, published in September 2003. This was from Broad Gauge Society Publications, no image though, but a line of research to follow. I note that there is a broad guage eGroup, which is available for joining; together with a model of Edgware Road in mixed gauge days. Amongst the BGS there may be someone who knows more about Fowlers Ghost. Returning to the GWR photo, I offer the following Met No 2 (old style) Headcodes 1906; bear in mind that there needs to be some assumptions made here with admitting this as a piece of evidence - electric trains used the same headcodes as steam (in terms of positioning) and the 'all round Circle' headcode was used for whatever the primary (longest distance) route pertained at the time of the lower photograph. This may all be a red herring, but I suspect that the photograph of the GWR type loco is on a test train, composed of goods wagons after it was rebuilt to be a tender engine, as there seem to be an awful lot of 'important' people milling around in top hats. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Oct 17, 2008 20:00:08 GMT
Fascinating stuff. I had no idea there was a "Broad Gauge Society". The drawing in "the Engineer" is very interesting. If you have any more copies like this, I would find them very useful.
I always wondered about the photo of "Fowlers Ghost". It was the outside cylinders which bothered me. What sort of GWR loco do you think it is?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2008 9:38:04 GMT
It does not look to me like a GWR engine of around the time the Met opened. It has outside cylinders; the dome is the wrong shape, too far forward, and not in polished brass; and the safety valve cover seems to be the wrong shape. And there seems to be some strange device on top of the dome.
On the other hand, it seems to be standing on the broad gauge rails of mixed-gauge track; and the GWR was the only company building broad gauge locomotives....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2008 19:15:09 GMT
Theres a brief mention of the 'Ghost' in 'Broad Guage Locomotives' by Geof Sheppard (Noodle Books/Broad Guage Society 2008). No drawing or picture though. Just a note 'Built 1861, Wdn 1861'. As for the LT museum pic, outside cylindered broad guage locos are as rare as hens teeth and the only picture of one in the book is of a North Devon Railway 'Crewe' type of 1855 which is fundamentally different in a number of ways. The only other 2-4-0 locomotives mentioned that could qualify are three locos built for the Bristol and Gloucester Railway. 'No 1 'Tugwell', 2 'Industry' and 3 'Pilot' were built in September 1844 and lasted until the early 1850s. No 2 was sold to the North Devon Railway and lasted until 1870. I have a feeling it could be none of the above. While the book states that it is an attempt to bring together information about all of the broad guage locomotives that ever operated, the obviously pro-broad guage publication has ommited any mention of Deans 4-2-4 tank No 9. This loco was such an abject failure that all records of its existance have been pretty much eradicated from the records! It was nominally rebuilt as a 2-2-2 after proving itself incapable of staying on the track for more than a few yards. Its first steaming ended up with it falling into the Swindon Works turntable pit while being watched by William Dean himself!
The other book I have is the first part of J H Russells three-part work on GWR locos. There is no mention of any similar loco to the above either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutch on Oct 19, 2008 20:02:55 GMT
From Steamidndex refered to by MRFS42:-
So some outside cylinder 2-4-0 tanks were made for use on the Met by the GWR and - due to the well tank(s) condensers - were outside cylinder type. Is not the LU museum photo one of these?
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Oct 20, 2008 22:11:27 GMT
I think so, but after the conversion to a tender engine. IIRC the condensing tanks were separate from the main side tanks, though I'm trawling back through a distant memory of looking at a book that I didn't buy (principally because it was too GWR<spit>!).
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutch on Oct 27, 2008 20:01:24 GMT
I am attempting to trace down another set of references regarding the ‘Ghost’: one in the 1963 Railway Magazine and the other in a 1988 copy of Railway World. The earlier one is of more interest to me as it mentions illustrations of various ‘Ghosts’ and it predate the “Last Drop” article and thus might not have been influenced by. I intend pulling that book as well as the 1950’s History of the GWR engines – part 2 Broad Gauge, just in case.
However one thought does come to mind. Was the museum photograph printed in reverse. The engine seems to be running wrong road with a detached train behind?
Beside being put on the right track, does the photograph make more sense geographically and can the location be picked with any greater certainty? The nearest track appears to be broad gauge only, the middle one standard gauge only and the far one – mixed.
The Inner Circle lamp code also goes away to one unrecorded for passenger trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutch on Oct 31, 2008 9:34:26 GMT
Having had a bit of time off work whilst the kids are on half-term, I managed to do a bit of research which suggests that the 1901 Railway Magazine illustration is in error and that the photograph is indeed the ‘Ghost’. The two most authoritative works are: - Michael Robbins (1963) “Fowler’s Ghosts”, Railway Magazine, vol. 109, p. 390-394;
and
- Ian Huntley (1988) “Impressions of a Ghost”, Railway World, vol. 49, p. 134-138.
Both present compelling arguments that the 1901 illustration was one of Stephenson’s first designs which was significantly modified prior to building the prototype. Baker (1885, p.6) mentions that the locomotive was a 2-4-0 and illustrations of all broad gauge engines in the RCTS (1952) work on the subject share a common feature, namely the absence of steam domes including the Metropolitan class, one of which is illustrated below.  I think the killer blow though is a sketch of the engine penned by Fowler himself – now part of a museum archive – and remarkably similar to the photograph. His own copper-plate script even tells you how to drive it!  Fowler's own sketch (Robbins, 1963, p. 393) The Robbins and Huntley articles are too young to post but the 1885 papers by the Institution of Civil Engineers are too fascinating (to me at least!) to remain hidden. The first paper by Baker can be found here with Plate 1 and Plate 2. This is followed by the Barry paper which can be found here along with its Plate 3 and Plate 4. After the Barry contribution there are comments by contemporary engineers such as T.R. Crampton and the great Mr Fowler himself. An account of one of the trails (maybe even the one photographed) is given in The Times of 30 November 1861. PM me if you have difficulty finding the Robbins and Huntley papers. - Baker, B (1885) “The Metropolitan and Metropolitan District Railways”, Minutes of Proceedings, Inst. Civil Eng., vol. 81 (2054), p. 1-33
- Barry, J.W. (1885) “The City Lines and Extensions (Inner Circle Completion) of the Metropolitan and District Railways”, Proceedings, Inst. Civil Eng., vol. 81 (2060), p. 34-74
- RCTS (1952) “The Locomotives of the Great Western Railway – Part 2: The Broad Gauge”, The Railway Correspondence and Travel Society
- Sekon, G.A. (1895) “A history of the Great Western Railway : being the story of the broad gauge”, London : Digby, Long, & Co., 373 p.
- The Times (1861) “The Metropolian Subterranian Railway”, 30 November (Iss. 24104) p. 5, col. D
|
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Oct 31, 2008 14:41:07 GMT
Hutch, Thank you. The papers are indeed fascinating. PM on its way.
|
|
