Interesting pic - looks like an amateur picture - do you have any personal connection with it (eg pic taken by a family member or someone in the picture related to you for example).Hi All
My first post.
Does anybody know anything about the locomotive in the picture attached?
It may be industrial?View attachment 112128
Or "minor standard gauge"?
1930s?
Thanks - yes, plate 'halo' around head of that chap is a shame! Also wagon script obscured by fence...would be great if people on here knew more. Don't know if it might help if the thread title include a request to help identify the photo, in terms of attracting readers attention that is.Thank you alexl92. Agree: definitely Hudswell Clarke MSC short tank.
WesternLancer: It's certainly an amateur photo. I have no connection with it as it came from a job lot of fascinating photos I bought at local auction. These included all sorts of stuff from all over the country and Ireland (including Leek & manifold, Trallee & Dingle, West Clare as well as LMS and LNER stuff). Some were anotated on the back (and even some readable)! Most seem to be from the 1930s or 40s. If only the guy on the right didn't have his head in the way of the plate on the bunker! The wagon its pulling seem to be an open carrying coal? Front buffer bent down? Not railway uniforms. Therefore industrial/ coal mine/ iron works? But seems to have a sort of "head code" type light on the top front of the smokebox?
The date on the photo is 18th July 1937 and its makred "photo by R B Brindle"
According to "Hudswell Clarke & Company Locomotive Works List" by Clive Hardy, these were designed for MSC, and known as the "Canal" or Philadelphia" Class. Some were built for other companies, but I cannot find any listed with the name "Mary".A quick search found a list of MSC locos, but there is no Mary amongst them: not all were named and those that were mostly carried placenames. If it had been an MSC loco, then could it have been sold out of service? Or were locos of the type built for other users?
Colliery systems could have boxes, but the construction of the building makes me think it's not a signal box. Access stairs supported by a large brick pillar, and only a few narrow windows visible are not typical signal box characteristics.I'm wondering about the building behind the loco. And the one on the left looks like a signal box to me - which would be unusual on a colliery system ?
It looks as if the man standing on the left is carrying a red flag and the track is leading onto a cobbled surface.Interesting pic - looks like an amateur picture - do you have any personal connection with it (eg pic taken by a family member or someone in the picture related to you for example).
It maybe that the sleuths on this forum could work out or narrow down the location of the pic if it is known where that loco worked.
I wondered that at 1st glance but then though the building looks too big - like it is the end wall of a house with windows in it - or maybe a works building.I'm wondering about the building behind the loco. And the one on the left looks like a signal box to me - which would be unusual on a colliery system ?
There is a van in the background. Could the loco be leaving a small goods yard with a load for a local gasworks?I wondered that at 1st glance but then though the building looks too big - like it is the end wall of a house with windows in it - or maybe a works building.
Just beat me to it. Definitely, if anyone knows, it is likely to be the IRS.I would suggest contacting the Industrial Railway Society. It's some years since I was a member but their quarterly magazine used to regularly feature Mystery Photos, which could then be reviewed by their (expert) members. This could well be just up their street.
The above-mentioned book contains a photo of a "Philadelphia" class loco, and apart from minor details, it looks almost identical to "Mary".This doesn’t look like an HC “Philly” to me - more like a Hunslet.
Interesting info - wonder if @carlwebus has kept an eye on the thread? Given what they said about the pic hard to know if possible to verify for certain, but it sounds plausible info from that source.Have a look at MSC 31 or 32 and then compare it to “The Lady Armaghdale” (HE 686 - another former MSC loco) and you will see what I mean.
The Hunslet “jazzer” was the predecessor of the HC tanks on the MSC and that basic Hunslet design was also sold to others.
I now have a possibility. Hunslet 720 of 1900. Peel Hall Collieries, Little Hulton, Lancs. One of three HE IC 0-6-0T that worked here until the colliery closed in 1946.
Mary was HE 720/00, King Edward VII was HE 953/07, King George V was HE 1151/14. Mary was scrapped in 11/47 and the other two in 12/47. Info from IRS pocket book No 7 (Lancashire) page 401 and subsequent amendment sheets.
Peel Hall then became an opencast site for the NCB (Ministry of Power until 1952).
Queen Mary was of course King George V wife (hence the large liner name). Wouldn't have been queen at the time the loco was built, but they were king and queen by the time KGV was built, on these dates.
Have a look at MSC 31 or 32 and then compare it to “The Lady Armaghdale” (HE 686 - another former MSC loco) and you will see what I mean.
The Hunslet “jazzer” was the predecessor of the HC tanks on the MSC and that basic Hunslet design was also sold to others.
I now have a possibility. Hunslet 720 of 1900. Peel Hall Collieries, Little Hulton, Lancs. One of three HE IC 0-6-0T that worked here until the colliery closed in 1946.
Mary was HE 720/00, King Edward VII was HE 953/07, King George V was HE 1151/14. Mary was scrapped in 11/47 and the other two in 12/47. Info from IRS pocket book No 7 (Lancashire) page 401 and subsequent amendment sheets.
Peel Hall then became an opencast site for the NCB (Ministry of Power until 1952).
But could that have been another, older loco?first photo on this page is of the colliery in 1905
the loco on display looks completely different
Remarkable black and white pictures show Salford at the turn of the century
Remarkable black and white pictures show Salford at the turn of the centurywww.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
possiblyBut could that have been another, older loco?