Template talk:LNER Locomotives

"Bought In" classes
I was researching the LNER_Class_J94 J94 class today. As with other LNER loco pages that class includes this summary at the bottom. However the J94 class is not included perhaps because it was a "bought in" class rather than being an "in house" design.

The same applies to the O6 class, which is also on WikiPedia already as it's a rebadged LMS_Stanier_Class_8F LMS 8F

With this in mind I can't help feeling that a new heading for classes in this category is called for so that this page is what it says on the box: an index of LNER locos not of LNER (and its precedessors) designed locos. This should make it easier for people to track down all articles on LNER locos.

Paulatthehug 06:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear, this is part of a wider issue it seems. This page should really be a summary of the Locomotives of the London and North Eastern Railway page, but there some "bought in" classes are listed (under "Private manufacturers") and some, such as the O6 class, aren't.

Methinks that that page needs review and the two pages then need bringing into line ...

Paulatthehug 07:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Peppercorn A7 locomotives?
Currently, the Peppercorn section has A7 mentioned. This redirects to a North Eastern 4-6-2 machine that doesn't mention any rebuilding or similar. Is it meant to be there or supposed to be something else? --Tombomp (talk) 10:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

GER Class P43
I don't think any GER Class P43s survived into LNER ownership. Is it appropriate for this class to be listed in the LNER template? Biscuittin (talk) 16:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Been bold and removed it; you're correct. It can be accessed still from the other lists.--Tombomp (talk) 10:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Missing classes
Have been through my RCTS "Locomotives of the LNER", and added a few missing classes. The following classes are still missing, mostly because they didn't get an LNER class: -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * GCR class 7, 18 (engine 309B, sometimes mistakenly included in J8); ex-WMCQ 0-8-0T (GCR no. 400B)
 * NBR 0-4-0 tender loco, NBR no. 1011 (LNER Y10)
 * NER classes 38, 44, 398, 1001, 1440
 * all CVHR classes (F9, N18 and unclassified 0-4-2T)
 * all EWYU classes (J84, J85, N19) - J84 & J85 are not to be confused with the ex-NBR classes with similar designation
 * all MGNJ classes: "A Rebuild"; D52; D53; D54; J40; J41; C17; J93
 * C9 (Gresley rebuild of C7) ✅(C7 page contains "C9" section.)
 * D (Thompson rebuild of D49) ✅
 * USATC S160 Class
 * Austerity 2-10-0
 * all Diesels ✅
 * electric locos: EF1 (like EB1, but not rebuilt); EM2
 * some service stock
 * Have found reference to the CVHR 0-4-2T being allocated class Z6:
 * -- Red rose64 (talk) 11:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * NER Class Z (LNER Class C7) contains a section called "C9"
 * -- Ilovejames5 (talk) 08:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I thought the MGNJ was called Midland & Great Northern Joint Railway Ilovejames5 (talk) 06:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Class 44? I didn't know they existed Ilovejames5  07:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * See for example
 * Seven were built in 1881-83, originally 0-6-0ST they were rebuilt as 0-6-0T in 1898-1902; withdrawn 1914-26. Five were inherited by the LNER, but no LNER class was allotted, and there was no gap between J70 and J81 which could have been overlooked by the compilers of the RCTS book. After rebuilding, they did, however, have much in common with NER class E (LNER J71) but were not identical: for instance, Class 44 had a 24-inch stroke whereas Class E had 22-inch stroke. -- Red rose64 &#x1F98C; (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Seven were built in 1881-83, originally 0-6-0ST they were rebuilt as 0-6-0T in 1898-1902; withdrawn 1914-26. Five were inherited by the LNER, but no LNER class was allotted, and there was no gap between J70 and J81 which could have been overlooked by the compilers of the RCTS book. After rebuilding, they did, however, have much in common with NER class E (LNER J71) but were not identical: for instance, Class 44 had a 24-inch stroke whereas Class E had 22-inch stroke. -- Red rose64 &#x1F98C; (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Seven were built in 1881-83, originally 0-6-0ST they were rebuilt as 0-6-0T in 1898-1902; withdrawn 1914-26. Five were inherited by the LNER, but no LNER class was allotted, and there was no gap between J70 and J81 which could have been overlooked by the compilers of the RCTS book. After rebuilding, they did, however, have much in common with NER class E (LNER J71) but were not identical: for instance, Class 44 had a 24-inch stroke whereas Class E had 22-inch stroke. -- Red rose64 &#x1F98C; (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Seven were built in 1881-83, originally 0-6-0ST they were rebuilt as 0-6-0T in 1898-1902; withdrawn 1914-26. Five were inherited by the LNER, but no LNER class was allotted, and there was no gap between J70 and J81 which could have been overlooked by the compilers of the RCTS book. After rebuilding, they did, however, have much in common with NER class E (LNER J71) but were not identical: for instance, Class 44 had a 24-inch stroke whereas Class E had 22-inch stroke. -- Red rose64 &#x1F98C; (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Never mind, i added C9 in Gresley section Ilovejames5 (talk) 12:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Sources please
What is the source for using LNER class E3 for GCR Class 12A? -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Casserley & Johnson. (1966). Locomotives at the Grouping volume 2: London and North Eastern Railway. p. 35 — Only one (No. 169B) out of the 28 was left to the LNER and it was withdrawn in 1923. Iain Bell (talk) 20:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right - it does say that. However, I've previously detected many discrepancies between Casserley & Johnston's Locomotives at the Grouping series, and the partworks produced by the RCTS. Relevant parts are:
 * where we find "Although often referred to as class E3, there is no evidence that this was the L.N.E.R. classification. Official sources at Doncaster indicate that G.C. class 12A was the only identification for No. 169B. It was withdrawn in 1923, and it seems likely that no L.N.E.R. class was officially associated with this engine." The withdrawal date is given as June 1923, but the LNER classification scheme was approved on 3 September 1923.
 * I note we have a similar situation for class E6 : 'there is no foundation in fact for attributing E6 to class "901" although it would have fitted there conveniently' . -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * According to the LNER Encyclopedia, "The GCR Class 12A is sometimes described as LNER Class E3, but there is no evidence that this was an official class designation. Although there is a gap in the LNER classification scheme, No. 169B was withdrawn in June 1923 before 'E3' could be used." Ilovejames5 (talk) 08:40, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I note we have a similar situation for class E6 : 'there is no foundation in fact for attributing E6 to class "901" although it would have fitted there conveniently' . -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * According to the LNER Encyclopedia, "The GCR Class 12A is sometimes described as LNER Class E3, but there is no evidence that this was an official class designation. Although there is a gap in the LNER classification scheme, No. 169B was withdrawn in June 1923 before 'E3' could be used." Ilovejames5 (talk) 08:40, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * According to the LNER Encyclopedia, "The GCR Class 12A is sometimes described as LNER Class E3, but there is no evidence that this was an official class designation. Although there is a gap in the LNER classification scheme, No. 169B was withdrawn in June 1923 before 'E3' could be used." Ilovejames5 (talk) 08:40, 13 December 2022 (UTC)