5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 1/13

SECR K & SR K1 (River) classes[1]

The prototype K class No. 790 (later named RiverAvon) under SECR ownership. The class was namedafter rivers flowing within the Southern Railway's

operating area.

Type and originPower type SteamDesigner Richard MaunsellBuilder K: Ashford Works (1)

Brighton Works (10) Armstrong Whitworth (9)

K1: Ashford Works (1)Build date 1917, 1925–1926Total produced K: 20

K1: 1

SpecificationsConfiguration 2­6­4TUIC class K: 1′C2′ h2t

K1: 1′C2′ h3tGauge 4 ft 81∕2 in (1,435 mm)

Leading dia. 3 ft 1 in (0.940 m)Driver dia. 6 ft 0 in (1.829 m)Trailing dia. 3 ft 1 in (0.940 m)Wheelbase 35 ft 10 in (10.922 m)Length 43 ft 61∕4 in (13.265 m)

Height 12 ft 113∕8 in (3.947 m)

Axle load K: 18.50 long tons (18.80 t)Adhesive weight K: 52.75 long tons (53.60 t)

SECR K and SR K1 classesFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The SECR K class was a type of 2­6­4 tanklocomotive designed in 1914 by Richard Maunsell forexpress passenger duties on the South Eastern andChatham Railway (SECR), which operated betweenLondon and south­east England. The SouthernRailway (SR) K1 class was a three­cylinder variant ofthe K class, designed in 1925 to suit a narrowerloading gauge. They were among the first non­GreatWestern Railway (GWR) types to use and improveupon the basic design principles of power andstandardisation established by GWR ChiefMechanical Engineer (CME) George JacksonChurchward.[2] The locomotives were based on theGWR 4300 class, improved by the Midland Railway'sideals of simplicity and ease of maintenance.[3]

The K class was designed to be mechanically similarto the SECR N class 2­6­0 mixed­traffic locomotives.The class was the earliest large­scale use of the 2­6­4wheel arrangement in Britain.[2] Production begantowards the end of the First World War, and theprototype rolled out of Ashford Works three yearsafter design work was completed due to wartimeproduction constraints. The class replaced obsolete 4­4­0 passenger locomotives in an SECR fleetstandardisation programme.

Twenty­one locomotives were built: twenty K class(two cylinders) and one K1 class (three cylinders), thefirst in 1917 and the remainder between 1925 and1926. They operated over the Eastern section of theSouthern Railway network and were given the namesof rivers, being referred as the River class from 1925.Crews referred to the K and K1 classes as "RollingRivers" because of their instability when travelling atspeed. They were rebuilt as 2­cylinder SR U class and3­cylinder SR U1 class 2­6­0s (respectively)following a railway accident at Sevenoaks, Kent in1927. They continued in service with British Railways(BR) until the last was withdrawn in 1966. OneK class rebuild (No. 31806) is preserved on theSwanage Railway in Dorset and as of 2016 isoperational.

Contents

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 2/13

Loco weight K: 82.60 long tons(83.93 t)K1: 88.75 long tons(90.17 t)

Fuel type CoalFuel capacity 2.50 long tons (2.54 t)Water cap 2,000 imp gal (9,100 l;

2,400 US gal)Boiler pressure 200 lbf/in2 (1.38 MPa)Cylinders K: Two, outside

K1: ThreeCylinder size K: 19 in × 28 in (483 mm

× 711 mm)K1: 16 in × 28 in(406 mm × 711 mm)

Valve gear K: Walschaerts K1 (outside): Walschaerts (inside): Holcroft

Performance figuresTractive effort K: 23,866 lbf (106.161 kN)

CareerOperators South Eastern and

Chatham Railway→ Southern Railway

Class K and K1 classesNumbers K: 790–809

K1: 890Official name River classNicknames Rolling RiversWithdrawn 1927Disposition All rebuilt to U or U1 class

— One rebuild surviving

Contents

1 Background2 Design and construction

2.1 K class2.2 K1 class2.3 K and K1 class construction history2.4 Naming the locomotives

3 Operational details3.1 Performance of the tank

locomotives3.2 Accidents and incidents

3.2.1 Sevenoaks disaster4 Rebuilding

4.1 Performance of the rebuiltlocomotives and withdrawal

5 Livery and numbering5.1 SECR and Southern Railway5.2 Rebuilds in British Railways

service6 Operational assessment and preservation7 See also8 References

8.1 Notes8.2 Bibliography

9 Further reading10 External links

Background

Three factors dictated the type of locomotive thatcould operate on the South Eastern and ChathamRailway (SECR): the heavy passenger train loadings;the poor track quality; and the weak, lightly builtbridges.[4] On the lines of the former London,Chatham and Dover Railway (LCDR) – inherited bythe SECR in 1899 – beach pebbles had been used forballast[5] instead of conventional ballast, which hasirregular shapes that lock together to keep the track in place. These economies in construction meant thatonly locomotives with low axle loadings could operate safely over the track.[4] The SECR was thereforeunable to follow a coherent strategy to reduce the number of locomotive types inherited from the twoconstituent railways. Despite increased passenger and freight traffic between London Charing Cross andthe Kentish coast during the first decades of the 20th century, the Operating Department had to usemismatched classes of underpowered and obsolete 4­4­0 and 0­6­0 locomotives, which could operatewithin the restrictions imposed by the infrastructure.[6] This resulted in frequent double­heading, addingto operational costs.[7]

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 3/13

Richard Maunsell was appointed CME of the SECR in 1913, following the enforced retirement of HarryWainwright, who had left a range of competent but unspectacular locomotive classes that struggled tocope with the increased train lengths and loadings.[4] Maunsell reviewed the situation and planned tointroduce six standard classes – using only two boiler designs – which would work the entire traffic ofthe railway.[8] The first of these was the N class 2­6­0, which gave the SECR a capable mixed­trafficlocomotive. For the express passenger design that could cope with the heavy boat trains, Maunsellwanted to enlarge the existing L class 4­4­0 with Walschaerts valve gear and an enlarged superheater,but this design would have resulted in a too heavy axle loading.[6][8] Maunsell's newly recruitedassistants, G.H. Pearson and Harold Holcroft from the Great Western Railway at Swindon and JamesClayton from the Midland Railway at Derby, had recently been involved in the design of large passengertank engines and persuaded him to use the 2­6­4 wheel arrangement, which would allow the class tooperate at high speeds on the poor­quality track in north Kent.[8]

Design and construction

The 2­6­4 wheel arrangement was not in common use in Great Britain at this time, as many railwaycompanies operated routes that required locomotives with greater fuel capacity, or short branch lines thatnecessitated smaller locomotives. The 2­6­4 tank engine design had only been used once before forstandard gauge locomotives in Britain, on the Great Central Railway's 1B class freight locomotives of1914.[9] However, the configuration was ideal for the SECR, because of its shorter mainlines, andallowed for a long wheelbase with a leading axle to permit greater stability at speed on track curves. Thetightness of the curves on the former LCDR mainlines had constrained the size of locomotives operatingon the SECR, as they had been hastily erected during the nineteenth century to compete with those of theSouth Eastern Railway (SER).[9] The longer locomotive could also accommodate a larger boiler than a4­4­0, giving sufficient power to avoid double­heading of locomotives on heavier trains.[10]

The K class design used a "Bissel bogie" leading axle and a plain trailing bogie.[11] The trailing bogiepermitted the use of a large coal bunker that was capable of sustaining the locomotive over the runbetween London Charing Cross and Dover Marine, and side water tanks of 2,000 imp gal (9,100 l;2,400 US gal) capacity were used, negating the need for a tender.[1] The coupled wheelbase between therear and centre driving wheels was reduced from that used on the mechanically identical N class to 7 ft9 in (2.362 m) to accommodate the bogie.[11] The cab was fully enclosed, although the set of four smallfront spectacle plates (the windows on the front face of the cab for forward visibility) were the same asthose used on the N class.[12]

The K class was designed by Maunsell's team in 1914 as part of his proposed standardisation programmefollowing the N class,[10] but the designs were not shown to the railway directors until early 1915 toenable all six designs to be shown at once.[8] The design incorporated the principles of power andreliability established by George Churchward, using a Belpaire firebox that sloped downwards towardsthe cab instead of a round­topped version, a regulator located in the smokebox, long­travel valves forfree running at high speeds, a sharply tapered and domeless boiler, and a right­hand drivingposition.[9][10] The inclusion of these features is attributed to Holcroft, Maunsell's personal assistant,who had worked on the GWR 4300 class and the N class.[12] James Clayton, Maunsell's ChiefLocomotive Draughtsman, brought simpler and more functional Midland Railway influences to thedesign, such as the shape of the cab and the drumhead­type smokebox, which sat on a saddle that was ofwider diameter than the fully lagged and clad boiler.[13] The latter was fitted with Ross pop safety valvesand pressed to 200 psi (1.38 MPa).[13]

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 4/13

Other innovations by Maunsell's team included greater superheating surface area, locating the boilerwater top feed inside a dome­like cover with external clackboxes and water feed pipes mounted on eitherside, outside Walschaerts valve gear, and parts that could be shared with similar locomotive classes toreduce maintenance costs.[5] The firebox was narrower towards the rear and featured a continuouslysloping grate, whilst the ashpan was fitted with front and rear damper doors, the latter adjusted to clearthe rear driving axle.[13] The lower part of the coal bunker incorporated a water tank of 760 imp gal(3,500 l; 910 US gal) capacity. This was connected to two 620 imp gal (2,800 l; 740 US gal) side tanksby two rectangular pipes on either side of the locomotive that also formed supports for the cabfootplate.[14]

K class

In January 1915 Maunsell received authority to build six examples, but, as with the N class, productionwas delayed due to the use of the Ashford works for wartime armaments manufacture. Assembly beganin 1917 and the first, No. 790, emerged in July of that year.[15] It was based at Bricklayers Armsdepot,[16] preceding the earlier N class design into service by one month.[15] Further construction wasdeferred until after Ashford had caught up with the maintenance backlog caused by the war.

Ten more locomotives were ordered by the SECR from Ashford works in June 1920, and to speeddelivery the construction of frames, cylinders and side tanks was subcontracted to the Royal Arsenal atWoolwich. However, further severe delays at Ashford caused by the backlog of repair work meant thatthe boilers had to be supplied by the North British Locomotive Company.[17] Construction of theselocomotives had not begun by 1 January 1923, when the Railways Act 1921 merged the SECR withother railways in southern England to form the Southern Railway.[10]

Maunsell was appointed CME of the newly formed Southern Railway in 1923, and inherited the 1920SECR order for ten K class locomotives. The order was still outstanding in 1924, although most of thecomponent parts had been made. On 14 January 1925, Maunsell ordered No. 790 to be overhauled andtrialled on the Central section.[18] As the locomotive proved suitable for the operating conditions of thissection, the Southern Railway's Locomotive Committee proceeded with the assembly of the K classparts using outside contractors.[19] Nine sets of parts (Nos. A791–A799) were conveyed to ArmstrongWhitworth for assembly and the finished locomotives delivered in May and June 1925.[11] These weredual­fitted with vacuum and Westinghouse (air) brakes for use with the former London, Brighton andSouth Coast Railway (LBSCR) rolling stock on the Central section. Other differences from the prototypeincluded the relocation of the regulator to the dome and an increase in superheater area.[11] The tenth setof parts was retained by Ashford and used for the first member of the K1 class later that year.[20]

In May 1925 Maunsell ordered a further ten locomotives from Brighton works (Nos. A800–A809),which only had vacuum brakes for the SECR stock on the Eastern section.[18] They were deliveredbetween July and December 1926. This group had modified suspension on the bogie and leading axle, inan attempt to address complaints from the crews of rough riding experienced with earlier members of theclass.[17] A further 20 members of the class were ordered in March 1926 (ten each from Ashford andBrighton works), despite strong reservations expressed by the Operating Department concerning "thewisdom or desirability of placing so many large passenger tanks in service".[21] These were allocated thenumbers A610–A629, and work had begun on building the frames and cylinders when the order wascancelled following an accident at Sevenoaks in 1927 involving locomotive No. A800.[21] Thesenumbers were later allocated to the first production batch of U class locomotives.

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 5/13

The prototype K1 class No. A890River Frome, pictured at Bricklayers'Arms shed in July 1927. Note the flatcover above the buffers. Above theright­hand cylinder is the Holcroftvalve gear linkage to the insidecylinder.

K1 class

In August 1919, a proposal was put to the SECR’s Locomotive,Carriage and Wagon Committee for 2 and 3­cylinder tankengines of 2­8­0 wheel arrangement for heavy shunting of freightwagons.[22] They were to use the same boiler as the K andN classes and the general layout was similar to designs used bythe GWR in South Wales.[22] Nothing came of this proposalbecause of other commitments and the absorption of the SECRinto the Southern Railway.[22] In 1922, Holcroft suggested that 3­cylinder 2­6­0 tender locomotives with 6 ft (1,830 mm) drivingwheels should be built instead of tank locomotives.[23] Despitethe benefit of a greater operational range, Holcroft's immediatesuperior, Clayton, refused to pass this suggestion on toMaunsell.[23] The 3­cylinder principle was therefore applied tothe K class.[23]

At the Southern Railway’s January 1925 Locomotive Committeemeeting, when it was decided to use outside contractors to build the K class, Maunsell received authorityto retain one set of parts at Ashford works to construct a prototype 3­cylinder 2­6­4 tank. Themodification was based upon that used on N class No. 822 to produce a 3­cylinder locomotive in 1922,although it retained the 6 ft (1,830 mm) driving wheels and shorter wheelbase of the K class.[20] Themodification was the inclusion of an additional (inside) cylinder between the frames, and a crank axlewas fitted to the middle driving wheels. The axle was connected to the inside cylinder assembly by aconnecting rod inclined at 1 in 8 to clear the front driving axle.[24] This arrangement was supplementedby two smaller­diameter outside cylinders with 16 in (406 mm) bore (compared to the 19 in (483 mm)cylinders of the K class), and a greater chimney diameter.[20] The resulting prototype 3­cylinder "K1"was narrower than the K class and hence could work on routes with restricted loading gauge.[20] As withNo. 822, this locomotive used Holcroft's derivative of the Gresley conjugated valve gear to drive theinside cylinder.[15] To accommodate this, the boiler had to be raised by 3 in (76 mm) above the insidegear, raising the centre of gravity on the locomotive.[20]

The main visual difference between the K and K1 classes was at the front end: the K1 incorporated avertical metal cover above the front buffer beam to protect the third cylinder and associated Holcroftvalve gear assembly from the elements.[1] It also featured a new cab design with redesigned single frontspectacle plates, and a pair of substantially constructed steps were fitted behind both outside cylinders toprovide access to the running plate.[25] The lack of a middle cylinder on the K class locomotives hadallowed the provision of a footplate that curved from the buffers to the water tanks. The K1 prototypeemerged from Ashford works as No. A890, and underwent trials from 1 December 1925 before enteringregular service.[26] Only one locomotive of the K1 class was built; plans to build a further ten(Nos. A891­A900) alongside a batch of five N1 class 2­6­0s were cancelled after the Sevenoaks accidentin August 1927.[27] Following rebuilding as a 2­6­0 tender locomotive in 1928, No. A890 wasreclassified U1 and was the forerunner of twenty more basically similar locomotives built in 1931.[28]

K and K1 class construction history

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 6/13

Year Batch[12][25] Quantity SECR/SR numbers Class

1917 SECR (Ashford Works) 1 790 K 1925 SR (Armstrong Whitworth) 9 A791–A799 K 1925 SR (Ashford Works) 1 A890 K1 1926 SR (Brighton Works) 10 A800–A809 K

Naming the locomotives

For details of K and K1 class locomotive names, see: List of SECR K and SR K1 class locomotives

The K class prototype operated without a name until 1925, when the Southern Railway's publicitydepartment decided to name all express passenger locomotives. The locomotives constructed from 1925were named after rivers found within the Southern Railway's operating area, and the class becameknown collectively as the River class.[29] The first­completed Southern Railway K class No. A791 wasnamed River Adur whilst the former SECR prototype was given the name River Avon; names were alsoallocated to the cancelled 1926 batch of locomotives.[30] The K1 class locomotive No. A890 was namedRiver Frome.[30] The names were displayed on a rectangular brass nameplate fitted to the water tanksides.[11]

Operational details

The K class was intended to haul the SECR's Kent expresses, and was trialled between Charing Cross,Tonbridge, Canterbury East and Folkestone East.[11] A trial non­stop run between Cannon Street andFolkestone Harbour by No. 790 pulling a train of 300 long tons (305 t) had proved the water capacity ofthe side tanks to be insufficient for such runs.[23] No. 790 was also tested on fast Cannon Street, Redhilland Tonbridge trains during the spring of 1922, although rough riding between the latter two stationsmeant slower speeds over that part of route on subsequent runs.[31]

The Southern Railway's motive power re­organisation following the Grouping of 1923 expanded theclass for operations over the Central section.[11] The Westinghouse­fitted Armstrong Whitworth batchwas used on the air­braked Eastbourne and Brighton expresses and regular passenger service trains toPortsmouth.[11] The vacuum­braked Brighton batch was run­in on the Portsmouth route in preparationfor operating the Redhill–Reading line, the class regularly hauling the daily Birkenhead–Dover throughtrain.[11] The K1 was mainly rostered to haul the early evening express from Cannon Street to DoverMarine.[20]

Performance of the tank locomotives

The K class proved successful on well­maintained track.[5] It was capable of high speeds on expresspassenger duties, although their use was limited by the lower storage capacity of tank locomotives,which meant the K and K1 classes were prone to water shortages on the long Kent Coast routes, andprecluded them from working many of the former London and South Western Railway (LSWR) routeswest of London.[32] The need to save weight meant that compromises were made in some aspects of thedesign. The boiler size was constrained by the SECR’s axle­loading restrictions, with the result that the

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 7/13

design’s full steaming potential was not realised.[13] The failure to capitalise upon a larger boiler wouldalso affect Maunsell’s subsequent 2­6­0 classes, as they were given the same boiler despite their loweraxle­loadings.[13]

On the Southern Railway's Central and Eastern sections, crews complained that the locomotives rolledheavily and unpredictably on the cheaply laid track of the former SECR and LBSCR networks, leadingto their nickname, "Rolling Rivers".[5] The rolling was in part caused by the type of coil suspension andsteadying springs used on the Bissel truck and bogie axles, which caused adverse springing on poortrack.[33] These were modified in later batches, with limited success.[34] The rough­riding was alsoattributed to the frames, which were of insubstantial construction to save weight.[13] The bracing provedincapable of counteracting the stresses applied to the frames when travelling at speed and causedexcessive vibration on the footplate at higher outputs.[13]

The K1 prototype was slightly faster and more powerful than the K class, and gave a smoother ride atlow speeds.[35] It was also found to have a wider route availability due to the smaller outsidecylinders.[35] However, the Holcroft valve gear proved to be difficult to maintain in everyday service.This locomotive was also noted for particularly poor riding characteristics at high speed, derailing twicein 1927.[32] The first derailment occurred at Borough Green & Wrotham, near Maidstone on 31 March,when the flanges of the lead coupled wheel mounted the rails at 60 mph (97 km/h).[34] The secondderailment was at Bearsted on 20 August, when the lead driving wheel mounted and completely droppedoff the rails at 40 mph (64 km/h), derailing the train and causing serious damage to the track.[34] Thesederailments were attributed to the slightly higher centre of gravity of the boiler on the K1.[20] Althoughthe official reports of these accidents blamed the poor quality of the track, a group of directors sought tohave both classes banned from use on passenger services, but were overruled by the Southern Railway'sChairman of the Board of Directors, Everard Baring on grounds of cost.[28]

Accidents and incidents

In March 1927, locomotive No. 890 River Frome was hauling a train which derailed at Wrotham,Kent.[36]

On 2 August 1927, Locomotive No. 800 River Cray was derailed at Maidstone, Kent.[37]On 20 August 1927, locomotive No. 890 River Frome was hauling a passenger train which wasderailed at Bearsted, Kent. The cause was attributed to track defects.[38] The locomotive wasrepaired and re­entered service on 23 August. It was involved in a serious accident the nextday.[36]

Sevenoaks disaster

The K and K1 classes suffered from stability problems when travelling at speed over points andcurves.[5] The locomotive would initially roll (briefly lean heavily) to one side, followed by severalfurther rolls of gradually reducing amplitude, combined with a side­slipping movement that caused thedriving wheels to mount the rails.[23] Several minor derailments of members of the class were followedby the serious derailment of No. A800 River Cray at Sevenoaks, Kent, in August 1927, caused by acombination of a surge in the water tanks and the flanges of the locomotive's lead driving wheelsmounting the rail at speed due to poor quality track­work.[39] The locomotive was hauling a Cannon

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 8/13

The derailed locomotive on its sidefollowing the Sevenoaks disaster.

Street to Deal express with a Pullman carriage when the leadingdriving wheels derailed at 55 mph (89 km/h) over catch points ina cutting.[20] Several carriages were flung against a road bridge,injuring 40 and killing 13 passengers.[20]

In the days following the accident, two K and K1 class engineswere trialled on the London and North Eastern Railway's(LNER) Great Northern mainline under the supervision of thatcompany's CME, Nigel Gresley,[40] to gain an unbiased review oftheir riding qualities.[1] Locomotives No. A803 (K) andNo. A890 (K1), and King Arthur class No. E782, were tested onthe well­maintained LNER line between Huntingdon and St.Neots in October 1927, where few problems were found with locomotive stability.[20] On runs betweenKings Cross and Potters Bar with the LNER's dynamometer car, No. A890 was recorded at a top speedof 83 miles per hour (134 km/h) and A803 at 79 miles per hour (127 km/h), with no problems inriding.[41] When these engines returned from the LNER, the Southern Railway's General Manager, SirHerbert Walker ordered further trials to be led by Sir John Aspinall on the Western section main linenear Woking.[41] These were terminated by the Southern Railway's Operating Department, as the ridingof the locomotives at speeds near 80 miles per hour (130 km/h) rendered the locomotives unsafe.[41] Theinstability of No. A890 at speed was attributed to the helical springs on the Bissel truck and bogie.[42]

The 1928 accident inquiry did not attach blame to the Southern Railway for track maintenance orlocomotive performance issues, and noted that the prototype had run for eight years over the samestretch of line without complaint.[43] However, it identified the Brighton batch and No. A890 as beingmore susceptible to rolling on sharp curves with weak rail joints, although the entire class operatedwithout incident on the former LBSCR network.[44] The management of the Southern Railway realisedthat to have any success in operating the K class tanks on other parts of the network, vast stretches oftrack would require upgrading.[20] With the prospect of storing 20 locomotives whilst the necessaryupgrading took place, the management recommended the class be fully withdrawn from service.[1] Torecoup the expense of constructing the engines, Maunsell was given permission to rebuild them to thenew SR U class 2­6­0 tender engine design in 1928.[3] This decision also reduced the adverse publicitygenerated by the accident.[3] However, many of the components discarded during the rebuilding processwould later be re­used on another 2­6­4 tank locomotive designed to haul heavy freight on short trips:the 3­cylinder W class of 1932.[45]

Rebuilding

The rebuilding of the class as tender locomotives was cheaper than relaying track, particularly as in mostrespects the class had performed well. Rebuilding took place at Ashford, Brighton and Eastleigh railwayworks between March and December 1928, where the water tanks, rear bogie and coal bunker wereremoved.[46] The straight­sided 3,500­imperial­gallon (15,900 l) variant of Maunsell tender wasattached, allowing a greater operational range for the locomotives.[5] The rear bogies were later used onthe SR W class 2­6­4 tank locomotives (the only subsequent use of this wheel arrangement by theSouthern Railway, and their use was restricted to freight operations around London).[1] The solitaryK1 class locomotive was rebuilt in June 1928, and so became the three­cylinder prototype of the SR

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 9/13

When rebuilt, the K class wasincorporated into the U class. This isone of the rebuilds in BritishRailways service, No. 31803 atBournemouth. As K class locomotiveNo. A803, it was named River Itchen.

U1 class.[47] The Holcroft valve gear was later replaced with athird set of Walschaerts valve gear in February 1932, thusreducing maintenance.[48] None of the rebuilds retained theirnames.[29]

Performance of the rebuilt locomotives andwithdrawal

As members of the U and U1 classes, rebuilds were used mainlyon mixed­traffic as well as secondary passenger duties on linesbetween the main routes.[49] They were used all over theSouthern Railway network, but were little­used over the steeptrack gradients west of Exeter.[49] The smaller­wheeled N classwas preferred amongst crews for the same duties, as high­speedrunning was rare away from the main lines in the West Country.Heavier passenger work was allocated to Bulleid's UnrebuiltLight Pacifics, which were within weight restrictions in this area.[49] The 21 rebuilt locomotives enteredBritish Railways service in 1948. From 1955 a few were given replacement frames at overhaul: thesehad a shallower curve between the front buffer beam and the smokebox.[50]

Withdrawals took place between 1962 and 1966, by which time many of the rebuilds were based atGuildford shed.[50] Work was taken over by Oliver Bulleid's Light Pacifics, and the electrification ofmuch of the former Southern Railway network was imminent, making all the 2­6­0s surplus torequirements from 1963. The final rebuild was withdrawn from service in June 1966.[51]

Livery and numbering

SECR and Southern Railway

The K class prototype was painted in an unlined dark grey livery with white lettering and numbering.This Maunsell grey livery was introduced by the SECR as a wartime economy measure.[12] On Groupingin 1923, the SR replaced the liveries of the constituent companies with a standard sage green livery (thecolour being that previously used by Urie on the LSWR) with black and white lining, primrose yellownumbering and "Southern" on the tender.[52] From 1925, the K and K1 classes were repainted in a darkerolive green livery, introduced by Maunsell, with plain white lining and primrose yellow markings.[52]When rebuilt into the U and U1 classes, the locomotives were repainted in the olive green livery with"Southern" added to the tender tank.[53] This was carried into the Second World War when labourshortages meant that many U class locomotives were painted in plain black, with the result that by 1945all the class were running in black.[54]

The class prototype was initially numbered 790, with the rest following consecutively with a prefix "A"to denote a locomotive designed for the former SECR.[12] The system of prefixes had been adopted bythe SR to distinguish between locomotives with identical numbers acquired from different companies,and the K1 class became No. A890 when built in 1925.[52] This system was replaced from 1928 by arenumbering of all locomotives into one sequence, in which the K class rebuilds became Nos. 1790–1809,[50] and the K1 class rebuild became No. 1890.[55]

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 10/13

31806 near Corfe Castle on theSwanage Railway.

Rebuilds in British Railways service

The K and K1 classes were absorbed by British Railways as part of the U and U1 classes in 1948, whichwere given the BR power classification 4MT (mixed­traffic) in 1950.[56] This was later revised to 4P3Fin the light of operational experience on freight trains.[57] The locomotives at first retained theirSouthern Railway livery, with "British Railways" added to the tender when repaints were due.[57] From1949 to 1955, the U and U1 class locomotives were gradually repainted in the British Railways mixed­traffic lined black livery with red, cream and grey lining and the British Railways crest on the tender.[54]Numbers were changed to the British Railways standard numbering system: the series 31790–31809 wasallocated to the K class rebuilds, and 31890 to the K1 class.[56]

Operational assessment and preservation

For location details and current status of the preserved (rebuilt) locomotive, see: List of K andK1 class locomotives.

Sir Nigel Gresley's independent report on the K and K1 classesduring the mainline stability trials stated that they were welldesigned, mechanically reliable and capable of hauling expressesat high speeds on well­maintained track, which meant that theycould have been useful additions to the Southern Railway'ssuburban commuter fleet.[58] However, they were undoubtedlyprone to rough riding and instability, and not only on the poorestquality tracks.[20] The restricted water capacity also limited theiruse outside the Southern Railway's Central section. Theimpending electrification of the Brighton Main Line, scheduledfor 1932 also meant that fewer duties suitable for heavypassenger tank locomotives would be available in the 1930s. Thelack of a suitable role for both classes was considered when thedecision was made to rebuild them as U/U1 tender engines following the Sevenoaks disaster.[20] Inrebuilt form they continued to operate until the 1960s, and were capable of attaining speeds in excess of70 mph (110 km/h) with a greater degree of stability.[32]

One K class rebuild has survived: No. A806 River Torridge – converted to U class No. 1806 – wasrescued from Woodham Brothers scrap yard in Barry, Vale of Glamorgan, South Wales in October 1976for use on the Watercress Line.[59] It was restored to ex­British Railways condition as No. 31806.[60] InAugust 2014, the locomotive entered service with the Swanage Railway.[61]

See also

List of SECR K and SR K1 class locomotives

References

Notes

1. Clarke (February 2008), p. 40

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 11/13

2. Casserley (1966), p. 4363. Scott­Morgan (2002), p. 184. Whitehouse & Thomas (2002), p. 495. Clarke (February 2008), p. 386. Whitehouse & Thomas (2002), p. 507. Whitehouse & Thomas (2002), p. 518. Bradley (1980), pp. 66–679. Bradley (1961), p. 5210. Middlemass (1990), pp. 148–15411. Bradley (1961), p. 5312. Haresnape (1983), pp. 34–3613. Rowledge (1976), p. 814. Rowledge (1976), p. 1015. Railway Engineer (1923), pp. 140–14316. Bradley (1980), p. 6917. Bradley (1980), p. 7018. Holcroft (1965), pp. 145–14719. Bradley (1980), p. 11620. Bradley (1961), p. 5421. Bradley (1980), p. 7122. Rowledge (1976), p. 723. Holcroft (1965), p. 14724. Rowledge (1976), p. 1125. Haresnape (1983), p. 6626. Reynolds (1943), pp. 155–15627. Rowledge (1976), p. 2228. Bradley (1980), p. 11729. Burridge (1975), p. 4830. Burridge (1975), p. 4931. Rowledge (1976), p. 2532. Clarke (March 2008), p. 5533. Rowledge (1976), p. 4834. Rowledge (1976), p. 4935. Boocock (2010), p. 8736. Earnshaw 1989, p. 22.37. Gerard & Hamilton 1981, p. 41.38. Gerard & Hamilton 1981, p. 42.39. Railways Archive (2004) Ministry of Transport, Railway Accidents (http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docum

ents/MoT_Sevenoaks1927.pdf), (PDF copy of the original inquiry report for the Sevenoaks RailwayAccident), Retrieved 6 January 2010

40. Bradley (1980), p. 7241. Holcroft (1965), p. 14542. Pringle (1928), p. 2843. Pringle (1928), p. 1744. Pringle (1928), p. 1945. Rowledge (1976), p. 4346. Scott­Morgan (2002), p. 4647. Rowledge (1976), p. 3948. Clarke (March 2008), p. 5649. Herring, Section "U Class", pp. 120–12150. Haresnape (1983), p. 9251. Ian Allan ABC (1966), section: "U class"52. Swift (2006), p. 5053. Haresnape (1983), p. 8854. Bradley (1961), p. 6355. Haresnape (1983), p. 9356. Ian Allan ABC (1958), section: "U class"

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 12/13

Bibliography

Further reading

Fryer, Charles: Railway Monographs No.1: The Rolling Rivers (Sheffield: Platform 5 Publishing,1993) ISBN 1­872524­39­7Grayer, Jeffery: "Scuppering the "U­Boats"" in Robertson, Kevin: The Southern Way Issue No.7(Corhampton: Noodle Books (July 2009)), pp. 60–65. ISBN 978­1­906419­17­2.Nock, O.S.: Great Locomotives of the Southern Railway (Guild Publishing/Book Club Associates,

57. Longworth: Section "U class"58. Pringle (1928), p. 2659. Great Western Society (2000) Saved from Barry ­ SR locomotives. (http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/barrysr.ht

m), Retrieved 21 June 200960. Langston (2008), p. 11261. Wright, Andrew P. M. (24 June 2014). "Swanage Railway strengthens its fleet with three classic 1920s

Southern steam locomotives". Swanage Railway. Retrieved 5 May 2016.

Boocock, Colin (2010). Locomotive Compendium:Southern Railway. Hersham: Ian AllanPublishing. ISBN 978­0­7110­3423­5.Bradley, D.L. (1961). Locomotives of the SouthEastern and Chatham Railway 1st edition.London: Railway Travel and CorrespondenceSociety.Bradley, D.L. (1980). Locomotives of the SouthEastern and Chatham Railway 2nd edition.London: Railway Travel and CorrespondenceSociety.Burridge, Frank (1975). Nameplates of the BigFour. Oxford: Oxford Publishing Company.ISBN 0­902888­43­9.Casserley, H.C.: 'End of the Maunsell moguls—the Southern maids­of­all­work' (Railway World:1966, 27), pp. 436–440)Clarke, Jeremy: 'The locomotives of R.E.L.Maunsell, Part 3: The 'Mogul' family – SECR'(Steam World, 2008 (248)), pp. 38–41Clarke, Jeremy: 'The locomotives of R.E.L.Maunsell, Part 4: The 'Mogul' family – SR'(Steam World, 2008 (249)), pp. 54–57Earnshaw, Alan (1989). Trains in Trouble: Vol. 5.Penryn: Atlantic Books. ISBN 0­906899­35­4.Gerard, Malcolm; Hamilton, J. A. B. (1981)[1967]. Trains to Nowhere. London: George Allen& Unwin. ISBN 0­04­385084­7.Haresnape, Brian (1977). Maunsell Locomotives –a pictorial history. Hinckley: Ian Allan. ISBN 0­7110­0743­8.Herring, Peter (2000). Classic British SteamLocomotives. London: Abbeydale Press. ISBN 1­86147­057­6.Holcroft, Harold (1965). Locomotive Adventure:Fifty Years With Steam 3rd edition. London: IanAllan.

Ian Allan ABC of British Railways Locomotives.London: Ian Allan. Winter 1958–59.Ian Allan ABC of British Railways Locomotives.London: Ian Allan. Winter 1966–67.Langston, Keith (2008). British Steam Preserved:Illustrated Comprehensive Listing of Ex­BritishRailways Steam Locomotives. Horncastle:Morton's Media Group Ltd.Longworth, Hugh (2005). British Railway SteamLocomotives: 1948–1968. Oxford: OxfordPublishing Company. ISBN 0­86093­593­0.Middlemass, Tom: 'The "Woolworths" —Woolwich Arsenal's tentative entry into main linelocomotive building' (Backtrack, 1990 (4)),pp. 148–54Pringle, Col. Sir John W. (1928). RailwayAccidents: Report on the Derailment of aPassenger Train which occurred on 24 August1927, near Sevenoaks, on the Southern Railway.London: HMSO.Reynolds, W.J.: 'The Maunsell moguls' (S.R.Railway Magazine, 1943, 89), pp. 155–156Rowledge, Peter (1976). Maunsell Moguls.Blandford Forum: The Oakwood Press.Scott­Morgan, John (2002). MaunsellLocomotives. Hinckley: Ian Allan Publishing.ISBN 0­7110­2872­9.Swift, Peter (2006). Maunsell 4­6­0 King ArthurClass: Locomotives in Detail volume 4. Hinckley:Ian Allan Publishing. ISBN 0­7110­3086­3.Whitehouse, Thomas, Patrick & David St. John(2002). SR 150: A Century and a Half of theSouthern Railway. Newton Abbot: David andCharles.

5/19/2016 SECR K and SR K1 classes ­ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes 13/13

Wikimedia Commons hasmedia related to SECR Kclass.

1987) pp. 98–102,115,132–137,154–160. CN 5587Robertson, Kevin, ed.: "Scuppering the "U­Boats" ­ Years Earlier" (The Southern Way Issue No. 7:Corhampton, Noodle Books (July 2009)), pp. 66–67. ISBN 978­1­906419­17­2.

External links

The Railways Archive: Accident at Sevenoaks on 24August 1927 (http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?eventID=93)Southern e­group page: Maunsell K/K1 class 2­6­4T (http://www.semgonline.com/steam/k(se)class_01.html)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SECR_K_and_SR_K1_classes&oldid=720913428"

Categories: South Eastern and Chatham Railway locomotives Southern Railway locomotives2­6­4T locomotives Armstrong Whitworth locomotives

This page was last modified on 18 May 2016, at 18:26.Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution­ShareAlike License; additional termsmay apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is aregistered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non­profit organization.