The LNER Encyclopedia

G'day Gents

To go slightly off topic, class 31's had there fillers just under the bottom of the body, near to the boilers, there was a diagram at KX (1971/2) that required the fireman to refill the boiler tank at the station end of platform 8 at about 10pm,flexible water pipes could be found laying on the floor for this purpose, but they used to get damaged, I had that job one night, the coupling would not stay on so I had to haul the pipe up the roof, and open the filler lid, and fill the tank that way, needless to say, I got soaked in the process, good job it was summer.

manna

Postman Prat wrote:Hi 1H etc

I don't know but I suspect that the start and finish of the trough was inclined to avoid the scenario of the scoop hitting a large lip at the end!!

1H's point was that this is physically impossible. It reminds me of an old joke (not very PC these days) -

Q: Did you hear about the Ir*sh water-skier?
A: He spent his whole life looking for a lake with a slope.

1H was 2E wrote: " Just a little point about troughs, logical when you think about it. The surface of static water is (obviously!) level, and the ends of the trough must be the same height as the sides otherwise the water would just run out; it's the track level that dips down and rises again as it passes over the trough. Without this feature, scoops would always hit the end of the trough if not raised in time. .... "

Danby Wiske wrote:

Postman Prat wrote:Hi 1H etc
I don't know but I suspect that the start and finish of the trough was inclined to avoid the scenario of the scoop hitting a large lip at the end!!

" 1H's point was that this is physically impossible. .... "

I know nothing much of the realities of troughs and scoops in practice, but I don't see why Postman Prat's suspicions that the troughs had inclined starts and ends, or at least the trough floor was inclined at each trough-end (provided of course that the incline was upwards towards the trough-end) - As long as the trough ends-(whatever their profile), were of at least the same height as the long side walls, then the water would have been retained.

I must say that I had somehow long had the impression that trough floors were inclined upwards towards the trough-ends, which I presumed was to minimise scoop damage if it was not raised in time at the exit end [though I suppose that compared to a vertical trough-end, an inclined one at the start wouldn't help reduce damage much in the event of a scoop being lowered too soon! ].

So were trough-ends definitely vertical-ended ? - [ One thought; - If the exit trough-ends were vertical, when a loco took water wouldn't there be a sudden up-and-out surge of water to a greater or lesser degree under the loco when the scoop's 'bow wave' hit the trough-end ? And could this cause any problem there or under the leading vehicle?]

I always understood that the track was inclined at the end and assumed that the trough was just finished off 'square' but it appears that I was wrong.

Anyway I found this article which gives a good account of the history and also the design details.
Plus it shows a good photograph of the end of a trough. Unfortunately it's from a website about 'another' railway Water troughs

And for a few more good photographs of the general design, and another trough end here is one of the David Heys pages.
Look about three quarters of the way down the page.

There is a picure of an EE type 4 picking up water in Westmoreland. While in most shots the track is normaly ballasted, here there are boards covering the ballast between the sleepers and along the track edges. Outside of the cess is what appears to be stone or concrete pavers.
I guess there was a problem with the water supply here and they tried to recover as much of the spill as possible.

Alan

manna wrote:G'day Gents

To go slightly off topic, class 31's had there fillers just under the bottom of the body, near to the boilers

From memory if the loco had a full-tank of water and was pulled up sharp the water tank would overflow onto the track regardless of the filler cap being on or not?.

Thanks for the links, Seagull. As I mentioned upthread, trough ends were chamfered off. Lord knows I spent enough time looking at them at Langley.

Going back over a few points raised; I did appreciate that the end of the base of the trough sloped upwards but the point I was trying to make was that, however it ends, the end must be at the same height as the sides, and the geometry is arranged so that a lowered scoop will not strike the end of the trough. Some sources have implied that the slides sloped downwards at the ends, which would require amendment to a basic law of physics.
I was only familiar with the 'troughs on the ex LNWR - Bushey, Castlethorpe, Hademore - and these all had the boards etc. mentioned above. I suggest this might have been to prevent the ballast being scoured away rather than conserve water - there was a channel/ditch alongside which collected the overflow water, but I don't know whether it then just ran into the nearest water course or was recycled. Incidentally, although most traces of the troughs mentioned have disappeared, the water tower and softening plant at Castlethorpe remain as a result, I've been told, of being 'listed'.
Regarding filling Brush 2s - is it correct to infer that there was a roof mounted filler as well as one on the tank?
I can distinctly remember seeing a photo of a non-steam loco having its tank filled from a water crane but I now wonder whether the photo. actually showed one of the SR C-C electric locos.

Below are links to three photo's of water level indicators..

https://www.flickr.com/photos/32297024@N08/6801123856/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robdaniels/6979602055/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robdaniels/6979600499/

Were these to indicate the level in a tank or trough and what actions were required for high or low indication?

Just watched the renewal of Wiske troughs on a Fastline films DVD.
Runout plate is a shallow ramp, transitioning from a full channel section to a flatplate.
Run in plate looks a similar layout.

So, with the track descending into the troughs, then ascending at the other ends, the bottom of the troughs at the ramp ends would have been the same distance from the sleepers as the rest of the troughs. Very complicated, but I just about understand now. They must have cost an absolute fortune to maintain, as everything would have to be dead right. Sleepers at troughs wouldn't have lasted as long either. Not with all that water

How would they have managed during the winter, with the water freezing?

I have found one at Langley troughs, i got this years ago and it has no name of the photographer on it. so unable to give any credit.

One of the Finsbury Park Deltics on a Down express near to the sight of the present day Stevenage station at a guess either in 1964 or 1965?.

Mickey

Spot on, Mickey. Go on google maps to the location and, on street view, take a look southwards from Six Hills Way bridge. You'll think it's a different planet.

Thanks for finding that one.

Just got around to buying the RCTS Green Guide for the Pacifics. Interesting that there's a reference to problems with troughs encountered by the Gresley Pacifics when they ran over the NER troughs and, later, the GWR spec one on the GW&GC Joint into Marylebone.
The problem was that the following dimensions are relevant; depth of bottom of trough below rail-top, height of water surface above rail-top, width of trough. All of these had no natural value so varied between companies.
The whole question of water pickup is apparatus is hardly covered in the enthusiast press, as far as I can make out. For instance, there's mention of GC tenders having the pick up gear removed after the war; but did this extend to the dome behind the coal space? No reason why this needed to be done, but important to modellers. I also understand that every the LMS 8F built during and after the war was constructed to original drawing and had water pick up gear, even including the ones built for Turkey (where water was so short that water tank wagons were coupled behind the tender so hardly likely to be needed) and the ones built by the SR (who had no troughs) for the LNER (Cl O6) presumably to the LMS spec for troughs - did they make contact with the trough itself, like the A1s did at first on the ex-NER?
Looking for signs of the gear under the tender of an express loco I was told that "all preserved locos have had the scoops removed - too much trouble" so that line of enquiry has ended.