Talk:LNWR Class G1

Super D
I have removed the photo of 49395 because it is not a G1. It is a G2, built new in 1921. There is a lot of confusion because some railway enthusiasts have a habit of referring to all superheated LNWR 0-8-0s as "Super D". Biscuittin (talk) 07:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * There are plenty of LNWR 0-8-0 photos at Commons. It would be appreciated if you could help with some categorization work on them, or to offer guidance on if there's any way to tell a G1 from a G2. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:34, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do. Biscuittin (talk) 19:38, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I've tidied up the cats on Commons. I'm not sure if this is infallible but it looks as though the 175 lb boiler (G2 and G2a) has "clock hands" on the smokebox door while the 160 lb boiler (G1) has a "wheel and hand". Biscuittin (talk) 11:22, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * There is considerable variation between individual locomotives of nominally the same class. Consider that Class G2a consisted entirely of rebuilds from G1, and that Class G1 consisted of 170 engines built new, plus 279 rebuilds from Classes B, C, D, E, F or G; it is highly unlikely that all the G1 looked exactly like all other G1, or that all the G2a looked exactly like all other G2a. All that you can say is that the sixty locos of class G2 probably looked alike when new, being built in a continuous run in 1921-22 (Crewe motion numbers 5662-5721), and not being subjected to major rebuilding. I definitely would not rely on the type of dart lock to distinguish a G1 from a G2a - the type fitted will have depended upon what was available at the time. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge all?
Can the LNWR 0-8-0 classes be covered appropriately in separate articles? Or would it be best to merge them and have sections within an overall article? The underlying problem is that so many of these were rebuilds between classes, not a simple lifecycle through one class. This makes the class histories complicated and even the history of individual numbered locos too. Size wouldn't appear to be an issue. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:49, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * My recollection is that they were all in a single article (although I can't now identify it) and it has been split. Biscuittin (talk) 19:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * There was a split quite recently (see history of LNWR G Class, which is now a redirect); but pre-split the article had covered Classes G/G1/G2/G2a - the other classes always had their own pages. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Questions
I am finding some inconsistencies. The G1 is supposedly a G with a superheater but the cylinder bore seems to have dropped from 20.5" to 19.5". Is this a mistake? Also, when did the change from Stephenson to Joy valve gear take place? Biscuittin (talk) 16:45, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I would recommend checking Essery & Jenkinson; they are generally considered reliable, whereas I have noticed errors on that website in the past. Unfortunately I don't have a copy. My notes made some 25 years ago (possibly from E&J) suggest that of the 2-cyl simples, Class C1 had 18.5" bore, Classes C & D (and prototype no. 2524) had 19.5" bore, whilst classes G, G1, G2, G2a had 20.5" bore. Valve gear on the compounds was Stephenson; on those built new as G1 or G2 it was Joy; but I have no record as to what the rebuilds had. There were at least two variations of valve gear on class G1 alone: most had indirect action (i.e. rocking levers), some direct action. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2012 (UTC)