Tenders - How flexible ?

[Dad-1]

As I always claim "I know nothing about railways" but I am learning and need expert help from time to time.

Were tenders mostly seen as a lifelong attachment ....... Until death do them part ?
I don't know what sort of draw-bar was used to couple up and if these were specific to the host engine ?

My curiosity has been started by one of my favourite steam locomotives a 3MT, ahh ..... not that 3MT, but the GW Region version.
Yes the Collett 2251 series, often referred to as a Collett Goods although why when they were used as much for passenger work as freight
I don't know ! Having a GWR 'B' yellow rating they were super little engines real maids of all work.
However They don't seem to have run very often with Collett tenders, which I would assume were made for the job. Many had Churchward
tenders of 5T coal, 3000 gallons. Others ran with secondhand tenders that were saved from Aberdare locomotives which were originally from
the Robinson 04 series, those being a larger 4000 gallon tender, they all had different all-up weights - Churchward 36T 12 CWT; Collett 39T
15 CWT; 47T 14 CWT for the ex Robinson 04/Aberdare version.

As non tank locomotives were useless without a tender that carried adequate amounts of coal and water just how flexible were they ??

I'm interested in anyones comments.

Geoff T.

[johnco]

It was not unusual to see a loco with different tenders at various stages of its working life.
BR standard locos were fitted with larger capacity (water) tenders for operation on Southern lines because of the lack of water troughs.

[SRman]

Some types had tenders on a more permanent basis whereas others got swapped quite regularly. There were also temporary allocations, such as the ones johnco mentioned, or the Bulleid Pacifics: a few Merchant Navys ran with West Country/Battle of Britain tenders for a while after entering service due to their own tenders not having been completed on time. All three Bulleid Pacific classes were infamous for their tender swapping within their groups.

Some Stanier tenders were swapped for Fowler tenders on the LMS 4-6-0s.

Essentially, it is a case of checking photos and archive records of your chosen locomotive(s) at the chosen time period ...

... Or just get out your Modeller's Licence!

[bike2steam]

Unless there were specific requirements from the running department, locos, and tenders were seperated when entering works for a general to heavy overhaul, when complete the loco was paired with the first appropriate tender that was available.

[kieranhardy]

or the Bulleid Pacifics: a few Merchant Navys ran with West Country/Battle of Britain tenders for a while after entering service due to their own tenders not having been completed on time. All three Bulleid Pacific classes were infamous for their tender swapping within their groups.

Not forgetting the couple like 'Bude' that ran with a Stanier tender during the trials.

[6C]

The GWR/WR was the only one that applied a common user type attitude to tenders - i.e. the loco would be overhauled - and recieve the next suitable ready tender.

For some reason, some the LMS Jubilees gave up their Stanier 4000 Gall. tenders to new Black Fives - recieving Fowler 3500 tenders in their place - later in BR days @1960 most of these were transferred to 8F's the Jubilee finally getting a Stanier tender from the 8F's !

Some of the 04 Tenders for the 0-6-0 came form GWR Rods too - there were simply very useful tenders - 4000 Gall. etc.

[Bufferstop]

Hi Geoff
Tenders were quite capable of outlasting locos of the same vintage and then you got into the position of a new loco receiving a previously used tender, which may well then have required replacement before the loco was withdrawn. Add to that, that it was often found necessary, for operational reasons, to equip a class of locos with a new design of tender and you soon reach the situation where even if the policy was to keep them paired as much as possible, there would be plenty of opportunities for a loco to have it's tender swapped. As in all other things, no matter what the book says a photograph will often tell a different story. I'm sure that there were plenty of unrecorded instances of a loco going out to do a day or two's work with the nearest tender to hand when its tender required running repairs and there was a loco of another type in the shops also for running repairs.
John W
aka Bufferstop.

[Dad-1]

Hi Guys, thanks for the feedback.

I didn't realise the Southern went for big water capacity tenders due to lack of water-troughs.
It's often difficult to remember that even back in the old days cost was of great concern so
re-using tenders made sense, they certainly had less mechanical points of wear and those there were
were easy to service & repair.

I suppose the continued use of the larger Robinson 04 tenders on the Collett goods was because of the
extra range offered due to greater capacity, so long as they met the route weight limits.

I do get interested in obscure happenings, the why and hows and tenders are something very rarely
discussed yet therein lie so many stories of railway evolution. I know nothing, but I'm learning !!

Geoff T.

[johnco]

Mallard and Flying Scotsman also went through over 12 Different tenders between them during their service years. They also used several boilers as well.
George Washington's axe which is preserved has I beleive had several new heads and handles over the years.

[Tiddles]

This would also suggest all tenders and locos where built to the same basic platform (cab floor) and drew bar height

Yet the cab floor of a 9F feels higher than that of a Dean Goods

[roadie stu]

there were actually two types of Collett tender, the standard 4000 gallon version and a smaller 3500 gallon version

http://www.newrailwaymodellers.co.uk/Fo ... 32&t=23673

Hope this helps

Stu

[bike2steam]

This would also suggest all tenders and locos where built to the same basic platform (cab floor) and drew bar height

Yet the cab floor of a 9F feels higher than that of a Dean Goods

Indeed, BR standard loco cab floors were about 12 inches higher than ExGW locos, not having the relevant dimensions to hand, BR locos were about 6 feet above rail tops, ExGW being nearer 5.There were variations in cab floor heights, and loco to tender couplings between the post grouping companies, and BR, but modifications could be made to, say, couple a SR loco to a LMS tender.

[stuartp]

Some Stanier tenders were swapped for Fowler tenders on the LMS 4-6-0s.

From "The Stanier 4-6-0s of the LMS" by Rowledge and Reed (David & Charles, 1977):

"Original allocations and subsequent reallocations of Jubillee tenders were complicated in the extreme... the NBL engines had their Glasgow-built Stanier-type tenders, many of these were subsequently exchanged for old standard 3500 gallon tenders off Royal Scots. 5726/27/38/39/41/42 had tenders transferred from Princess Royal Pacifics when the latter got 10-ton coal tenders during the time the later Jubillees were being built.

Suprise has sometimes been expressed at the number of Jubillees given 3500 gallon tenders. Apart from the desire to give the more powerful Royal Scots the bigger tenders, Stanier himself reported to the Locomotive Committee in 1932 that 3500 gallons was the best quantity for general purpose, but for longer runs or heavier haulage than that found at the time larger tenders would be advisable. The last proviso led to the 4000 gallon model.

Change of tender type was not simply a matter of uncoupling one and coupling up the substitute when different classes were involved. Adjustments were needed to intermediate drawbars and buffers, and liners had to be inserted to reduce tender brake cylinder diameter when taking a tender from a 225 lb/sq in. Jubillee and attaching it to a Royal Scot working at 250lb/sq in. The original Fowler tenders also continued to give trouble with buffer locking."