LNER dock shunter, steam railcars, Sentinel, Met-Camm

This forum is for the discussion of the locomotives, motive power, and rolling stock of the LNER and its constituent companies.

Moderators: 52D, Tom F, Rlangham, Atlantic 3279, Blink Bonny, Saint Johnstoun, richard

Hatfield Shed
LNER A3 4-6-2
Posts: 1422
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 3:34 pm

LNER dock shunter, steam railcars, Sentinel, Met-Camm

Post by Hatfield Shed »

Despite the LNER's extensive maritime connections, there was no group standard 'dock shunter' design produced; instead the Sentinel company's designs were purchased to supplement the inherited pre-group designs. The thought occurs, was this simply Doncaster's policy applied to the whole group?

Title edited to better reflect content within.
Last edited by Hatfield Shed on Sun May 15, 2022 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Danby Wiske
GER D14 4-4-0 'Claud Hamilton'
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:09 am

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by Danby Wiske »

I'd always understood that the Sentinels were cheaper to operate (requiring one man instead of two), so it was perhaps more to do with economics than design policy - as was often the case on the cash-strapped LNER...
Hatfield Shed
LNER A3 4-6-2
Posts: 1422
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 3:34 pm

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by Hatfield Shed »

That's most likely correct. Needs a dig through the Locomotive Committee minutes to confirm, if there's anyone out there at a loose end....
Last edited by Hatfield Shed on Tue May 10, 2022 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
65447
LNER A4 4-6-2 'Streak'
Posts: 1663
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Overlooking the GEML

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by 65447 »

Danby Wiske wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 1:56 pm I'd always understood that the Sentinels were cheaper to operate (requiring one man instead of two), so it was perhaps more to do with economics than design policy - as was often the case on the cash-strapped LNER...
Not sure that the Sentinel shunters were single-manned, certainly the Y10s could not be with dual cabs requiring the fireman always to be at the boiler end, and firing involves taking your eyes of the road.
They were however reckoned to have approximately half the running costs of a 'normal' locomotive and easy on maintenance, hence their widespread use for such duties.
Finally, in most instances, dockside working involved working on public roads or quaysides dominated by non-railway staff, so a more tram-like covering of the mechanisms meant that they conformed with the legal requirements.
Danby Wiske
GER D14 4-4-0 'Claud Hamilton'
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:09 am

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by Danby Wiske »

65447 wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 5:17 pm Not sure that the Sentinel shunters were single-manned,
Agreed re the Y10, but they were a bit of an oddity! Regarding the far more numerous Y1/Y3, the relevant page of this very website says:
Due to their slow speed, the Y1 and Y3 shunters were rarely used to haul trains. Instead, they proved particularly useful shunting in small yards where there was insufficient work for a larger locomotive. Another advantage was that they could be operated by one person.
65447 wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 5:17 pm ...and firing involves taking your eyes off the road.
But this is only a problem when hauling a train. On shunting duties there would be plenty of opportunities for the driver to tend the fire while the engine was stationary...
65447
LNER A4 4-6-2 'Streak'
Posts: 1663
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Overlooking the GEML

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by 65447 »

Danby Wiske wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 11:22 pm Due to their slow speed, the Y1 and Y3 shunters were rarely used to haul trains. Instead, they proved particularly useful shunting in small yards where there was insufficient work for a larger locomotive. Another advantage was that they could be operated by one person.
'That they could be' is not the same as stating that they were...
Many photographs confirm crews of two.
john coffin
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:24 am

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by john coffin »

Since the GNR didn't build any of its own docks, it would have had any need for such locos.
Even its place in Liverpool didn't need such a thing, although a couple of the saddle tanks would
have been small enough for many places it visited.

However, it is certain that the idea of a new GS loco would have been one of the lowest items on the TUIT list,
not least since few of the locos in service were very old from the pre grouping companies.

The interesting thing is that although there were a lot of different Sentinels on the LNER, no drawings
appear to have survived, except a couple of magazine ones which of course we now question the accuracy of.

Paul
Hatfield Shed
LNER A3 4-6-2
Posts: 1422
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 3:34 pm

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by Hatfield Shed »

john coffin wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 1:20 pm Since the GNR didn't build any of its own docks, it would have had any need for such locos.
Even its place in Liverpool didn't need such a thing, although a couple of the saddle tanks would
have been small enough for many places it visited.
There's a picture in Dennis Lovett's neat monograph on the NLR, showing Stirling 0-6-0ST no 603 moving sheeted opens out of the GNR sidings at Poplar docks. Despite the rough looking inlaid track and 'modest' radii of the pointwork to rear of the loco, this standard design is clearly of sufficiently short wheelbase for the trip over the NLR lines that served the GNR sidings at these docks.

Apart from this example, I am thoroughly ignorant of any other GN goods sheds in London dockland locations.
john coffin
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:24 am

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by john coffin »

Pretty sure that Poplar was the only actual Dockside facility on the Metro WIdened lines of the GNR,
and there are no other "known" ones. I am pretty sure they might have had to migrate a little
but not too far.

The earlier Stirling saddle tanks certainly were quite short in their wheelbase, up to a foot
shorter than later standard ones.
Paul
Danby Wiske
GER D14 4-4-0 'Claud Hamilton'
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:09 am

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by Danby Wiske »

65447 wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 8:53 am 'That they could be' is not the same as stating that they were...
Many photographs confirm crews of two.
Fair point. I'd have thought that the LNER would have jumped at the chance of saving the fireman's wages, so maybe ASLEF weighed in?
Last edited by Danby Wiske on Wed May 11, 2022 6:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Danby Wiske
GER D14 4-4-0 'Claud Hamilton'
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:09 am

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by Danby Wiske »

john coffin wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 1:20 pm The interesting thing is that although there were a lot of different Sentinels on the LNER, no drawings
appear to have survived
Anything in the Rolls-Royce archives?
65447
LNER A4 4-6-2 'Streak'
Posts: 1663
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Overlooking the GEML

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by 65447 »

john coffin
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:24 am

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by john coffin »

sadly, not many known dimensions.

also really interested to see if anyone has drawings of the railcars by Sentinel,
ie Tally Ho etc

Paul
drmditch
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:55 pm
Location: Durham

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by drmditch »

The GNR may not have built any 'dock shunters', but the NER, which was the largest dock owner of the constituent companies certainly did.
Morever, a quick check indicates that the last five of the NER's Class H (LNER Y7) were built in 1923.

Since the Y7s and Y8s were clearly capable, and after WW1 underutilised, why would the LNER management need to build more?
(Especially when there was a commercially available alternative as in the Sentinel Y1s and Y2s.)

Apart from the 0-4-0s, most pictures that I have seen of dock estate/quayside operations show 0-6-0s, such as the Es and E1s (J71 and J72s).

I keep thinking that a nice 'mini-layout' might be Newcastle Quayside, with an NER electric to take a J72 up and down the tunnel, and then sorting out wagon loads on the Quayside and up to Trafalgar yard!

(Only real problem would be that even a pre-1950s ship would be very large!)
Hatfield Shed
LNER A3 4-6-2
Posts: 1422
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 3:34 pm

Re: The GNR didn't design a dock shunter, so neither did the LNER

Post by Hatfield Shed »

drmditch wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 7:22 pm The GNR may not have built any 'dock shunters', but the NER, which was the largest dock owner of the constituent companies certainly did.
Morever, a quick check indicates that the last five of the NER's Class H (LNER Y7) were built in 1923...

...Apart from the 0-4-0s, most pictures that I have seen of dock estate/quayside operations show 0-6-0s, such as the Es and E1s (J71 and J72s).
I assume that Y7 batch would be the fulfillment of an existing NER order?

Hadn't thought at all about the adoption of the NER E1 / J72 as the LNER group standard light shunter design... Think that wraps it up!
Post Reply