FORMULA ‘E’
Now the Bluebell Railway has approved the construction of a replica SECR ‘E’ 4-4-0 (SR500), THOMAS BRIGHT explores the history of these somewhat low-profile locomotives.
The history of the South Eastern & Chatham Railway’s ‘E’ 4-4-0s
Let’s face it, barring another round of deaccessions, the National Railway Museum’s unique South Eastern & Chatham Railway ‘D’ No. 737 is probably never going to run again.
Arguably, it never should, given that it is in pristine ex-Ashford Works condition – having been lovingly cosmetically restored at the place of its birth prior to its inauguration into the National Collection – but it is nonetheless a shame that perhaps the most beautiful locomotive ever to grace British rails will likely never again turn a wheel in anger.
So, if we can’t steam the ‘D’, what’s the next best thing? An ‘E’ of course.
The news in June last year that the Bluebell Railwaybased Brighton Atlantic Group intended to build a replica of one of these Wainwright 4-4-0s was therefore warmly welcomed. But it did come as a bit of a surprise.
The group has long pondered what engine it would build after it finishes its nearly complete replica of LBSCR ‘H2’ No. 32424 Beachy Head, the leading contenders being an LBSCR ‘K’ 2-6-0 or possibly a Craven outside-framed 2-4-0. It also considered other Brighton designs, such as an ‘L’ 4-6-4T, a ‘C2X’ 0-6-0, a ‘D1’ 0-4-2T, a ‘D2’ or ‘D3’ 0-4-4T, an ‘I3’ 4-4-2T or a ‘J’ 4-6-2T. Certainly not an SECR ‘E’.
However, group secretary and treasurer David Jones told Steam Railway in late 2018 that “talk of followon projects is no more than window shopping” (SR489).
Therefore, the revelation that the group intended to build a replica ‘E’ came somewhat out of the blue.
In many ways, it is highly appropriate that an ‘E’ should be resurrected on the Bluebell Railway. Even though it is an ex-London, Brighton & South Coast line – perhaps the SECR’s bitterest competitor for dominance in the southern counties – the Bluebell has become the unofficial home of the SECR in preservation. After all, it hosts all but two surviving Chatham locomotives (the Southern-built ‘N’ 2-6-0 excepted); the ‘C’ and ‘O1’ 0-6-0s, ‘H’ 0-4-4T and three ‘P’ 0-6-0Ts. Only a further ‘P’ (the Kent & East Sussex Railway’s No. 753) and the aforementioned ‘D’ are based elsewhere.
Given that No. 737 is – for now at least – permanently incarcerated at York, it is perhaps logical that the Bluebell should
want to bridge the gap in its operational SECR motive power with a replica ‘E’. But if you canvassed a hundred enthusiasts, asking them what Southern engines they would like to see resurrected, odds are an ‘E’ would not be at the top of the list.
After all, we already have the ‘D’, and even though it will probably never run again, how different is it from an ‘E’? What can a replica ‘E’ tell us that No. 737 cannot – even if it is only static?
Before we explore why the Brighton Atlantic Group plans to tackle the Chatham 4-4-0, it would be prudent to delve into the ‘Es’ history.
BORN FROM PARTNERSHIP
The ‘Es’ were born out of one of the most corrosive rivalries in British railway history – that between the London, Chatham & Dover and South Eastern railways. Competing as they were for the same traffic over similar routes across the south east pushed both companies to the brink of bankruptcy, so in 1899, the rivals buried the hatchet and amalgamated into the South Eastern & Chatham Railway.
The new combined company was in dire need of modern motive power however, as its predecessors hitherto had little money to invest in new locomotives and rolling stock, giving both the LCDR and SER a decidedly poor reputation in the eyes of the travelling public. To remedy the situation, Harry Wainwright – formerly the SER’s Carriage & Wagon Superintendent – was appointed as Locomotive, Carriage & Wagon Superintendent of the newly formed company. However, he had very little locomotive design experience, so Robert Surtees, previously the LCDR’s chief draughtsman, was given the same position, working under Wainwright.
To replace the LCDR and SER’s ageing locomotives, Wainwright and Surtees designed a powerful 4-4-0 that was light enough to operate over the lightly laid routes to Dover and Hastings, but was still an improvement over its forebears. The resulting locomotive, combining
the engineering nous of Surtees and the design flair of Wainwright, was the ‘D’.
A total of 51 ‘Ds’ were built by Ashford, as well as Dübs & Co., Robert Stephenson & Co., Sharp Stewart and Vulcan Foundry, between 1901 and 1907, and they immediately proved to be free-steaming and smoothriding locomotives.
However, the introduction of steam-heating on principal expresses placed extra demand upon them, so Surtees and Wainwright designed a 4-4-0 heavily based on the ‘D’ but with a Belpaire firebox (instead of the ‘Ds’ round-topped example), 6ft 6in driving wheels (as opposed to previous 6ft 8in drivers ) and a higher boiler pressure (180lb/sq in over 175lb/sq in).
Logically – or rather unimaginatively, depending on your disposition – the new engines were designated as ‘E’. In all, 26 ‘Es’ were built at Ashford between 1906 and 1909 and, like their predecessors, they proved to be useful machines, but the heavy nature of their work resulted in frequent fire-throwing, much to the displeasure of local arable farmers.
To cure the problem, in 1907, ‘D’ No. 247 was fitted with an extended smokebox, albeit with a smaller diameter than the smokebox wrapper. This curious modification was nonetheless a success and although no further ‘Ds’ were so modified, all new ‘Es’ from 1908 onwards were similarly fitted with an extended smokebox – albeit to the same diameter as the rest of the smokebox.
Despite evidently being a robust and successful design, the lifespan of the ‘E’ as the SECR’s primary express motive power was reasonably short and by 1913, locomotive performance was subject to much criticism which, combined with his ill-health, prompted Wainwright’s retirement. The ‘Es’ were subsequently superseded by the more powerful ‘L’ 4-4-0s completed by Wainwright’s successor – Richard Maunsell – although the initial design work had been instigated by Surtees and Wainwright before the latter’s retirement.
To add insult to injury, ‘E’ No. 179 was heavily rebuilt by Maunsell with a larger Belpaire firebox, a higher degree of superheat, and improved valve gear which drew upon Swindon practice – with the idea of creating a locomotive that could meet increased traffic demands over the Chatham route but with a light enough axle loading to satisfy the SECR civil engineer’s requirements.
The resulting ‘E1’ design, although handsome, had
none of the ‘E’s’ elegant good looks, but the rebuild was so successful that a further ten ‘Es’ were treated, while 21 ‘Ds’ were rebuilt along similar lines into the all-but mechanically identical ‘D1s’.
With only about half the number of ‘Ds’, the ‘Es’ seemed to forever live in their predecessors’ shadow. None survived into preservation, with the majority being withdrawn in 1950/51 (although one example, No. 31166, lasted until May 1955). Meanwhile, the last ‘Ds’ were not withdrawn until December the following year.
Given their somewhat low profile, it begs the question: why resurrect a design that was but a relative footnote – albeit a handsome one – in Southern locomotive history?
PRACTICALLY AN ‘E’
Unlike many new-build projects, the reasons are more practical than emotional. Writing in the group’s Atlantic News newsletter, chairman Terry Cole said: “After the (sometimes fiendish) complexities of the ‘Atlantic’, we were looking for something rather simpler which would be easy to build and easy for the railway to maintain.”
Perhaps the primary advantage of the ‘E’, particularly over Beachy Head, was the non-superheated boiler, which the group estimates will save “at least £100k-£200k off the build cost and a huge amount off ongoing maintenance.”
Other advantages over the other contenders considered include the availability of drawings; the straightforward design – particularly of the front bogie and cylinders; the commonality of design and parts with the ‘C’, ‘H’, ‘O1’ and ‘P’ classes; and the ability to haul five or six coaches, making it ideal for the majority of Bluebell services. Other attractions of the ‘E’ are the fact that it is vacuum-braked rather than air, and the ready availability of some sundry items, including the tender wheelsets and brake gear, half a steam reverser and brass dome cover, among others.
The choice of an ‘E’ may be more of a practical one, but the example the group intends to replicate is certainly more of an enthusiastic consideration – No. 516.
The original was perhaps the most noteworthy member of the class. Built new (complete with extended smokebox) in 1908, it was exhibited at the Franco-British Exhibition in West London that year and, perhaps as a result of its star turn there, was frequently used for Royal Train duties. It survived in ‘unrebuilt’ form until its withdrawal in September 1951, after which it was subsequently scrapped.
The Brighton Atlantic Group believes it can build No. 516 for around £1.2m at today’s prices, and in around 10-13 years depending on fundraising. However, it acknowledges that, based on its the age profile, “it is unlikely that the present team will see this project through, and so considerable thought has been given to succession planning and passing on the knowledge and skills already acquired to the next generation.”
But that’s tomorrow’s problem. Until the group finishes Beachy Head, a prospect which is expected in 2021, it will be some time before No. 516 gets off the starting blocks. But the Bluebell board’s endorsement of the project was the firing of the starting pistol; the first tentative step along the path towards a new SECR ‘E’.
It might not be everybody’s favourite, nor the one many hoped the group would tackle, but there is little doubt that this small but dedicated team – which has accomplished more on Beachy Head than many of its fellow new-build peers – can make No. 516 a reality.
And besides, if we can’t steam ‘D’ No. 737, this is definitely the next best thing.