Question: The Origins of the Myth of the Strategic Steam Reserve

Cowley · 9 Feb 2020

Journeyman said:
I assume the converted 501s are what eventually materialised to fulfill the role. They seem to be some of the most mysterious and poorly documented rail vehicles anywhere. I only ever saw them in depots, never working, and photos of them in use seem very rare. I have no idea where they were used, or when they were withdrawn.

It was great if you’d managed to get a couple underlined in your book back then (especially if you were from my neck of the woods) though...

RailUK Forums

70014IronDuke · 10 Feb 2020

So many posts in this thread ridicule the idea that a strategic reserve would have been kept because the country would have been a wasteland after a nuclear attack. Ignoring the fact that that would depend on the number of nuclear warheads launched or dropped, this assumes any attack by the Soviets would have gone nuclear.

I think this is false. The Soviet leaders and military up to 1990 had all suffered (more or less) from WW2. They didn't want an all out war, which would certainly have risked millions of Soviet lives, including their families. But exercising economic war, in particular, cutting oil supplies by turning the Gulf States against the West - that would be a different thing, and under such circumstances the presence of a strategic reserve in the 1970s would have made some sense.

I'm not saying it happened, I'm not even saying it was contemplated in any serious way, but it is not so stupid when this kind of scenario is considered.

DelW · 15 Feb 2020

It's interesting (well, to me anyway!) to speculate what might have formed such a reserve had it existed. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have been the ragbag of oddments whose scrapping was uncertain at the end of steam, which may have been one of the origins of the myth.
You'd want a mixture of classes, but priorities would be wide route availability, ease of maintenance, reliability and versatility, so I'd start with something like:

9Fs
Black 5s (maybe including Standard 5s)
Austerity tanks (from NCB or MoD?)

All of which were numerous enough to allow the best or most recently overhauled to be chosen.

randyrippley · 15 Feb 2020

DelW said:
It's interesting (well, to me anyway!) to speculate what might have formed such a reserve had it existed. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have been the ragbag of oddments whose scrapping was uncertain at the end of steam, which may have been one of the origins of the myth.
You'd want a mixture of classes, but priorities would be wide route availability, ease of maintenance, reliability and versatility, so I'd start with something like:

9Fs

Black 5s (maybe including Standard 5s)

Austerity tanks (from NCB or MoD?)

All of which were numerous enough to allow the best or most recently overhauled to be chosen.

One of the key needs would also have been the ability to burn low grade coal as post-attack we would have lost access to the deep mines due to lack of power. The railways would have to use whatever stocks were available at ground level.
That would suggest the wartime austerities and post-war standards as they were supposedly optimised for low grade fuel.
How critical was the fuel type for the Black 5s and Black 8s?

ChiefPlanner · 15 Feb 2020

randyrippley said:
One of the key needs would also have been the ability to burn low grade coal as post-attack we would have lost access to the deep mines due to lack of power. The railways would have to use whatever stocks were available at ground level.
That would suggest the wartime austerities and post-war standards as they were supposedly optimised for low grade fuel.
How critical was the fuel type for the Black 5s and Black 8s?

Heaven knows - but the ability to run on poor coal wold surely depend on the work required plus the stamina of the fireman and the skills of the driver. Continental engines seemed to manage on slack / dusty small coal for more than a short period.

Bevan Price · 15 Feb 2020

DelW said:
It's interesting (well, to me anyway!) to speculate what might have formed such a reserve had it existed. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have been the ragbag of oddments whose scrapping was uncertain at the end of steam, which may have been one of the origins of the myth.
You'd want a mixture of classes, but priorities would be wide route availability, ease of maintenance, reliability and versatility, so I'd start with something like:

9Fs

Black 5s (maybe including Standard 5s)

Austerity tanks (from NCB or MoD?)

All of which were numerous enough to allow the best or most recently overhauled to be chosen.

The long wheelbase of 9Fs might have been a problem on some lines, so keeping some Stanier 8Fs would have been desirable. Also keeping some lighter-weight locos would have been useful, maybe some Ivatt or BR 4MT 2-6-0s.

Cowley · 16 Feb 2020

Bevan Price said:
The long wheelbase of 9Fs might have been a problem on some lines, so keeping some Stanier 8Fs would have been desirable. Also keeping some lighter-weight locos would have been useful, maybe some Ivatt or BR 4MT 2-6-0s.

The BR 76xxx 2-6-0s seem to have been a well regarded loco, and I know it’s straying a bit off topic here... But why didn’t Riddles/BR introduce a direct 2-8-0 replacement for the 8F then?
The 9Fs seemed to be almost too powerful for most of the mundane heavy freight jobs that they often seemed to do (which incidentally the 8Fs seemed to thrive on). yet the 8Fs lasted right to the end, which from my ‘not being alive at the time and wish I was’ point of view seems curious? Apart from the (his) small class of WD 2-10-0s it wasn’t really used was it?

DelW · 16 Feb 2020

Good thought on the 8Fs, they and the WD 2-8-0s must have run on some pretty poor coal across Europe and the Middle East during WW2. I imagine they could be kept running with fairly minimal servicing and maintenance facilities too.

edwin_m · 16 Feb 2020

Cowley said:
The BR 76xxx 2-6-0s seem to have been a well regarded loco, and I know it’s straying a bit off topic here... But why didn’t Riddles/BR introduce a direct 2-8-0 replacement for the 8F then?
The 9Fs seemed to be almost too powerful for most of the mundane heavy freight jobs that they often seemed to do (which incidentally the 8Fs seemed to thrive on). yet the 8Fs lasted right to the end, which from my ‘not being alive at the time and wish I was’ point of view seems curious? Apart from the (his) small class of WD 2-10-0s it wasn’t really used was it?

Presumably, allowing for 2-10-0s taking over some work, there were considered to be enough 2-8-0s of the Stanier or WD variety with life remaining that they didn't need to build any more. For the same reason they didn't need to build more of the heaviest express passenger locomotives (except Duke of Gloucester which was ostensibly to replace a LMS Pacific lost at Harrow), so clearly the Standards weren't intended to be a comprehensive range for all duties but more to fill the gaps in the fleet at the time. I think I read somewhere that a Standard 2-8-0 was originally planned but changed to a 2-10-0 at the last minute.

Perhaps if BR hadn't decided to dieselise in the 1950s there would have been another build of Standards, including different classes such as a 2-8-0.

70014IronDuke · 16 Feb 2020

Bevan Price said:
The long wheelbase of 9Fs might have been a problem on some lines, so keeping some Stanier 8Fs would have been desirable. Also keeping some lighter-weight locos would have been useful, maybe some Ivatt or BR 4MT 2-6-0s.

Yes. Also, I wonder if the 9Fs had a bit too large a grate vis-a-vis the 8Fs. Fine if working long mineral trains, but wasteful if standing around very much.
The Ivatt/Standard 2MT 2-6-0s (464xx, 78oxx) could have been contenders too - I believe the heritage lines have found them very effective.

Mind you, the WR would have insisted on having Castles in the reserve in its territory - in fact, they'd have probably gone and built another 30 for the hell of it

ChiefPlanner · 16 Feb 2020

70014IronDuke said:
Yes. Also, I wonder if the 9Fs had a bit too large a grate vis-a-vis the 8Fs. Fine if working long mineral trains, but wasteful if standing around very much.
The Ivatt/Standard 2MT 2-6-0s (464xx, 78oxx) could have been contenders too - I believe the heritage lines have found them very effective.

Mind you, the WR would have insisted on having Castles in the reserve in its territory - in fact, they'd have probably gone and built another 30 for the hell of it

The last batch of 9F's - built at Swindon were really not needed (a case was made that they were to replace "worn out" ex GWR 2-8-0 engines) - a cynic might say it was to keep Swindon works going - even the regional managers had some concerns , so the decision was batted to the BRB , who let it go ahead , resulting in a very low life expectancy for the class , at a time when average freight loadings were in freefall due to structural changes in steel and coal , and road competition for other traffics. But then - building a fleet of 94xx tank engines was just as bad - let alone the other diesel builds.

Off topic - but 9F's would not really have been the answer as other commentators have sensibly pointed out. Hard to beat Stanier products really - and this from someone who admires GWR traction. (bar the useless cab ambience etc)

RLBH · 17 Feb 2020

Cowley said:
But why didn’t Riddles/BR introduce a direct 2-8-0 replacement for the 8F then?

Hordes of ex-WD Austerity 2-8-0s meant they weren't needed. A Standard 2-8-0 was sketched out, and Swindon wanted to build a batch (well, they actually wanted to build some more of the 28xx class) but were told to build 9Fs instead.
I really think that a strategic reserve would be looking at the kind of locomotives needed under war emergency conditions - which means Austerity 2-8-0s and 0-6-0STs, and not a lot else. Probably 2-6-0s for some work not needing a 2-8-0, but under emergency conditions a lot of branch line traffic uneconomic in peacetime would either disappear or be suppressed.

Meerkat · 17 Feb 2020

There is a strategic diesel reserve in a tunnel somewhere - that’s why that scrapyard was stopping people actually seeing them scrap Pacers......

70014IronDuke · 17 Feb 2020

RLBH said:
Hordes of ex-WD Austerity 2-8-0s meant they weren't needed. A Standard 2-8-0 was sketched out, and Swindon wanted to build a batch (well, they actually wanted to build some more of the 28xx class) but were told to build 9Fs instead.

Was it? I thought the alternative to the 9F was a 2-8-2?

RLBH said:
I really think that a strategic reserve would be looking at the kind of locomotives needed under war emergency conditions - which means Austerity 2-8-0s and 0-6-0STs, and not a lot else. Probably 2-6-0s for some work not needing a 2-8-0, but under emergency conditions a lot of branch line traffic uneconomic in peacetime would either disappear or be suppressed.

Well, it depends what "emergency conditions" exactly. Had there been a long squeeze on oil imports, branch lines would have been used a lot for freight delivery, as opposed to road, with diesel in short supply.

Taunton · 17 Feb 2020

ChiefPlanner said:
But then - building a fleet of 94xx tank engines was just as bad - let alone the other diesel builds.

The BR-ordered 94xx were notably not built at Swindon (the first 10 were, in the dying days of the GWR) but by a wide range of the private builders around the country. One might pick up that at a time of a Labour government they were built in Labour areas, but then all loco manufacturing plants inevitably were. Orders were placed with 5 different companies; two decided not to build them in the end, but subcontracted them onward to the others that did. A lot of them didn't make it to first overhaul for Swindon to sort out the build quality issues, eg with bearings.

The Western Region men would rather have had 200 more 57xx instead, which they found more straightforward, but London Had Spoken. Hurcomb, BTC Chairman in the early years, was a career civil servant, doubtless didn't understand the difference between the two Panniers, and was doubtless readily leant on by his political masters.

RLBH · 18 Feb 2020

70014IronDuke said:
Was it? I thought the alternative to the 9F was a 2-8-2?

The original 9F was a 2-8-2; I've seen a sketch claimed to represent a proposed Standard 8F 2-8-0.

Bevan Price · 18 Feb 2020

RLBH said:
The original 9F was a 2-8-2; I've seen a sketch claimed to represent a proposed Standard 8F 2-8-0.

The RCTS "History of BR Standard Locomotives", Volume 4, includes drawings of possible BR Standard designs that were never built. These included alternative versions of 8F 2-8-0s, and various 2-8-2 options.

O8yityityit · 18 Feb 2020

Of course the diesels would have survived a nuclear attack. As long as they were stored at somewhere like Longsight or Newton Heath which as any self respecting CND member would know both reside within the Nuclear free city of Manchester........

Journeyman · 19 Feb 2020

O8yityityit said:
Of course the diesels would have survived a nuclear attack. As long as they were stored at somewhere like Longsight or Newton Heath which as any self respecting CND member would know both reside within the Nuclear free city of Manchester........

Ah, that's alright then.

Just don't store them in Sheffield, land of the irradiated armed traffic wardens guarding food supplies, and that terrifying woman holding the charred dead baby....*shudders*

Threads was utterly terrifying. I panic every time I hear the Words and Pictures theme tune these days.

Cowley · 19 Feb 2020

Journeyman said:
Ah, that's alright then.

Just don't store them in Sheffield, land of the irradiated armed traffic wardens guarding food supplies, and that terrifying woman holding the charred dead baby....*shudders*

Threads was utterly terrifying. I panic every time I hear the Words and Pictures theme tune these days.

Yeah I watched it last year for the first time in years. The special effects are pretty dated but it still makes me shudder thinking about parts of it.

Merle Haggard · 19 Feb 2020

Taunton said:
The BR-ordered 94xx were notably not built at Swindon (the first 10 were, in the dying days of the GWR) but by a wide range of the private builders around the country. One might pick up that at a time of a Labour government they were built in Labour areas, but then all loco manufacturing plants inevitably were. Orders were placed with 5 different companies; two decided not to build them in the end, but subcontracted them onward to the others that did. A lot of them didn't make it to first overhaul for Swindon to sort out the build quality issues, eg with bearings.

The Western Region men would rather have had 200 more 57xx instead, which they found more straightforward, but London Had Spoken. Hurcomb, BTC Chairman in the early years, was a career civil servant, doubtless didn't understand the difference between the two Panniers, and was doubtless readily leant on by his political masters.

The 200 contractor-built 9400s were ordered by the Great Western Railway at the very end of their existence. A cynic might think that the reason the GWR signed contracts with the private loco. builders for 200 after building 10 at Swindon might be to make it difficult for the new organisation to cancel them.
The reasons behind the change in design from 5700 were outlined in 'The Pannier Papers' books. It was that the GWR Running Superintendent put in a request for further '8750' panniers and this was accepted by the CM&EE but over-ruled by the General Manager, who wanted something 'a little less Victorian looking' - actually, only slightly less because the requirement was 'a pannier tank without the bulbous dome'.
The LMS had built only diesels for shunting after 1933 and the SR also only diesels after the heavy steam 'Z' class.

Journeyman · 19 Feb 2020

Cowley said:
Yeah I watched it last year for the first time in years. The special effects are pretty dated but it still makes me shudder thinking about parts of it.

Threads is a fantastic example of what the BBC has always been very good at. However dated it looks, it was meticulously well-researched and sufficiently realistic to terrify a lot of people into thinking very carefully about the consequences of atomic sabre-rattling. Apparently it even caused Ronald Reagan a few sleepless nights, being one of the first major works to introduce the concept of nuclear winter to a wide audience.

Cowley · 19 Feb 2020

Journeyman said:
Threads is a fantastic example of what the BBC has always been very good at. However dated it looks, it was meticulously well-researched and sufficiently realistic to terrify a lot of people into thinking very carefully about the consequences of atomic sabre-rattling. Apparently it even caused Ronald Reagan a few sleepless nights, being one of the first major works to introduce the concept of nuclear winter to a wide audience.

That’s interesting I hadn’t looked at it like that. I assume that it was also shown in the USA then?

Journeyman · 19 Feb 2020

Cowley said:
That’s interesting I hadn’t looked at it like that. I assume that it was also shown in the USA then?

I believe so. It also makes a similar contemporary American film - The Day After - look like a Sunday school picnic.

xotGD · 19 Feb 2020

I love how this thread reached a point of discussing which classes of locomotive that were never built should have been included in the non-existent strategic reserve!

Journeyman · 19 Feb 2020

xotGD said:
I love how this thread reached a point of discussing which classes of locomotive that were never built should have been included in the non-existent strategic reserve!

Haha, indeed! The Strategic Reserve really is one of those perennial favourites, and it gets really interesting when you unpack it a bit, even though it's about 99.9999999999% likely that the idea wasn't even seriously considered.

RLBH · 20 Feb 2020

xotGD said:
I love how this thread reached a point of discussing which classes of locomotive that were never built should have been included in the non-existent strategic reserve!

Ah you see, if you put real locomotives into a non-existent strategic reserve, then you have to pull the real trains with imaginary locomotives, and chaos ensues.

ainsworth74 · 20 Feb 2020

Whilst Threads is an interesting, if grim, topic (some things that always sticks in my mind is pouring Saxo salt into a filthy bucket of water in the post-attack hospital to make saline solution or stripping those being summarily executed for looting because they can't spare the clothes) I do rather fear we've wandered of the subject somewhat!

Xenophon PCDGS · 20 Feb 2020

randyrippley said:
One of the key needs would also have been the ability to burn low grade coal as post-attack we would have lost access to the deep mines due to lack of power.

But that problem would have been solved by the use of the even more secret "Strategic Best Welsh steam coal reserve".... :lol:

Journeyman · 20 Feb 2020

RLBH said:
Ah you see, if you put real locomotives into a non-existent strategic reserve, then you have to pull the real trains with imaginary locomotives, and chaos ensues.

Aha! Good point. Presumably imaginary locos and imaginary trains have no compatibility issues.

Question: The Origins of the Myth of the Strategic Steam Reserve

Forum Staff

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Established Member