Talk:Pug (steam locomotive)

Article Move?
Well, it's not really correct, is it? The term 'Pug' appears to have been applied loosely to any small 0-4-0 saddle tank loco, so it doesn't count as a locomotive 'class' in the usual sense.

I would suggest Pug (steam locomotive) would be a more accurate article name.

EdJogg (talk) 12:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Change made as suggested Rosser Gruffydd 07:07, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've updated the linked articles to match. -- EdJogg (talk) 12:48, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Definition of a Pug
As far as I know, "Pug" is a distinctly Scottish term. I have never heard it used in England. I thought "Pug" was simply the Scots word for a tank locomotive but, at one point, the article seems to suggest that it applies to a 0-4-0T but not to a 0-6-0T. Can any Scots readers clarify the matter? Biscuittin (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It was used in England to refer to the L&YR 0-4-4STs, at least. I've never heard it used to refer to small industrial saddle tanks, despite spending some time around them in preservation. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This states 'The term "pug" was usually reserved on the N.B. for this class, whereas the neighbouring Caledonian men referred to all tank engines as "pugs".' -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The L&YR didn't have any 0-4-4STs. They did have some 0-4-4Ts with side tanks, 72 of these being introduced by William Barton Wright from 1877 and lasting until about 1910.
 * You are perhaps thinking of the Aspinall 0-4-0STs: "The first locomotives he ordered were three 0-4-0 saddle tanks, numbered 916-8, obtained from Vulcan Foundry in November 1886 (VF 1176-8). These were important in that they formed the basis of the famous Aspinall 'pug' design" "Aspinall prepared a design for a 0-4-0 saddle tank closely resembling the three Vulcan tanks ... The 'pugs', as they were known ..." . -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, sorry that was just a typo. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In this book we find the encompassing statement "Of shunting 'pugs' as tank engines were known throughout Scotland, there were ..." . It seems that "pug" could certainly mean a 0-6-0T, on the Caley at least: when discussing Drummond's CR locos, Highet states "Two classes of 0-6-0 saddle tanks were built. The first was in 1887, the year of Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee, hence the class became known as the 'Jubilee Pugs'" ; these were the Caledonian Railway 385 Class. The next paragraph begins "1888 also saw the production of six 'Dock Pugs', neat little 0-6-0 saddle tanks ... the boilers were very similar to those of the 0-4-0STs and Killin pugs" ; the 0-6-0Ts were the 272 Class, and the "Killin pugs" probably refers to the 262 Class, a pair of 0-4-2STs built immediately before the first eight of the 264 Class. But best of all is the frontispiece, a colour plate showing a Pickersgill 944 Class 4-6-2T, and in the caption is the text 'Wemyss Bay Pug'. "Pug" therefore does not exclusively mean a small steam loco, since these weighed in at 91t 13c spread over six axles. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, sorry that was just a typo. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In this book we find the encompassing statement "Of shunting 'pugs' as tank engines were known throughout Scotland, there were ..." . It seems that "pug" could certainly mean a 0-6-0T, on the Caley at least: when discussing Drummond's CR locos, Highet states "Two classes of 0-6-0 saddle tanks were built. The first was in 1887, the year of Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee, hence the class became known as the 'Jubilee Pugs'" ; these were the Caledonian Railway 385 Class. The next paragraph begins "1888 also saw the production of six 'Dock Pugs', neat little 0-6-0 saddle tanks ... the boilers were very similar to those of the 0-4-0STs and Killin pugs" ; the 0-6-0Ts were the 272 Class, and the "Killin pugs" probably refers to the 262 Class, a pair of 0-4-2STs built immediately before the first eight of the 264 Class. But best of all is the frontispiece, a colour plate showing a Pickersgill 944 Class 4-6-2T, and in the caption is the text 'Wemyss Bay Pug'. "Pug" therefore does not exclusively mean a small steam loco, since these weighed in at 91t 13c spread over six axles. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In this book we find the encompassing statement "Of shunting 'pugs' as tank engines were known throughout Scotland, there were ..." . It seems that "pug" could certainly mean a 0-6-0T, on the Caley at least: when discussing Drummond's CR locos, Highet states "Two classes of 0-6-0 saddle tanks were built. The first was in 1887, the year of Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee, hence the class became known as the 'Jubilee Pugs'" ; these were the Caledonian Railway 385 Class. The next paragraph begins "1888 also saw the production of six 'Dock Pugs', neat little 0-6-0 saddle tanks ... the boilers were very similar to those of the 0-4-0STs and Killin pugs" ; the 0-6-0Ts were the 272 Class, and the "Killin pugs" probably refers to the 262 Class, a pair of 0-4-2STs built immediately before the first eight of the 264 Class. But best of all is the frontispiece, a colour plate showing a Pickersgill 944 Class 4-6-2T, and in the caption is the text 'Wemyss Bay Pug'. "Pug" therefore does not exclusively mean a small steam loco, since these weighed in at 91t 13c spread over six axles. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)