LSWR Class M7
0-4-4T
This was a numerous and successful breed of tank engine, originally procured to
speed up LSWR suburban services. It followed in the footsteps of an earlier
0-4-4T design laid out by Chief Draughtsmen at Nine Elms, under the direction of
William Adams, the company’s then Locomotive Superintendent. Adams claimed he
felt safer riding a bogie engine, and a four-coupled design with large driving
wheels would remain stable at relatively high speeds. His counterpart on the
LB&SCR, William Stroudley, was keen to forgo the 0-4-4 wheel arrangement, for he
considered that when running forwards, the lateral control springs of the rear
bogie had too strong an influence over the front driving wheels. Indeed, in
terms of tender locomotives, bogie designs had generally been avoided because at
the time (circa 1885), the largest turntables in use could only just about
accommodate an 0-6-0 engine and its tender. Enlargement of many turntables was
considered too costly, because it involved expensive alterations to other
infrastructure. Unperturbed by Stroudley’s concerns over a bogie tank engine,
Adams introduced the Class 415 ‘’Radial’’ Tank 4-4-2 in 1882, the Class A12
0-4-2T in 1887, the Class T1 0-4-4T in 1888, and finally, the Class 02 0-4-4T in
the following year. These types were primarily employed on intensive commuter
services from Waterloo, prior to electrification in the following century.
Adams retired from the LSWR in May 1895 through ill health, and in the following
August Dugald Drummond became the company’s Locomotive Superintendent at Nine
Elms. Born on 1st January 1840, Drummond had a complicated employment history up
to this time, having started his career on an apprenticeship with Glasgow-based
Messrs. Forest Barr, a general engineering firm. He subsequently gained railway
experience with the Caledonian & Dunbartonshire Railway in Western Scotland,
where his father was employed as a permanent way inspector. In 1862, he was
employed at the Canada Works, Birkenhead, of Mr Thomas Brassey, who ran a civil
engineering firm. The company was primarily a railway builder, being awarded
contracts throughout the world to undertake works ranging from forging cuttings
and creating embankments, to laying track and building viaducts. Drummond left
Birkenhead in 1864, returning to his native Scotland to become Foreman at the
Cowlairs Works of the Edinburgh & Glasgow Railway (E&GR). It was here where he
first met William Stroudley, another giant of locomotive engineering. Stroudley
had joined the E&GR in 1861, taking the post of Works Manager at Cowlairs at the
age of 28.
The E&GR was absorbed by the North British Railway on 1st August 1865, but
Stroudley had earlier left for the Highland Railway on 19th June of that year.
He was appointed Locomotive & Carriage Superintendent at the company’s Inverness
Works, and took with him his Foreman from the E&GR, Drummond. Stroudley had a
five-year tenure with the Highland Railway, during which time scope for new
locomotive development was virtually non-existent due to the impoverished state
of his employer’s finances. Most of Stroudley’s work was thus concentrated on
improving and maintaining the existing locomotive fleet, although he managed to
produce one new type of locomotive, an 0-6-0T variant, which he would later
perfect on the LB&SCR. Stroudley became Locomotive Superintendent of the LB&SCR
at Brighton in 1870, where he soon began a large-scale standardisation programme
of the company’s motive power. Facilities were modernised in the form of new,
reorganised works and engine sheds, and he was again joined in his move south by
Drummond. The latter returned to Scotland in February 1875, when he was
appointed Locomotive Superintendent of the North British Railway at Cowlairs
Works, Glasgow. In June 1882, he moved to the rival Caledonian Railway (CR),
being appointed Locomotive Superintendent at St Rollox Works. It was here where
Drummond initially toyed with the idea of developing a four-coupled tank
locomotive with an 0-4-4 wheel arrangement and trailing bogie; indeed, 24 tank
engines of this type, with 5-foot driving wheels, were built for the CR between
1884 and 1891. In 1890, prior to completion of this production run, Drummond resigned from
the CR and made a drastic move overseas to Australia, where he founded the
‘’Australasian Locomotive Engine Works’’ in Sydney. This transpired to be a
fruitless exploit, and within a year he returned to Britain to start a second
business, that of ‘’Drummond D. & Son’’. This evolved into the ‘’Glasgow Railway
Engineering Company’’, which Drummond left in August 1895 to take up the
penultimate railway appointment in his career – that of Locomotive
Superintendent for the LSWR at Nine Elms (he was promoted to Chief Mechanical
Engineer in January 1905).
In his new post, Drummond immediately set to work on a new class of tank engine,
with the intensive suburban services from Waterloo in mind. As per those engines
procured during his time with the CR, he opted for an 0-4-4 arrangement,
although with larger driving wheels of 5-foot 7-inch diameter. In April 1896,
the decision was taken by the LSWR Board to tender out the contract to build an
initial batch of 25 of these engines, numbered in the series 242 to 256 and 667
to 676. The cheapest quote received was from Sharp Stewart & Co. at £2475 per
engine (£213,000 at 2008 prices), significantly higher than what the company had
envisaged. As a result, all locomotives were instead built in-house, the vast
majority at the LSWR’s Nine Elms Works, at a cost of £1400 each (£121,000 at
2008 prices). Eventually, fourteen separate orders with a cumulative total of
105 engines were put into production over a fourteen-year period. During 1909,
Nine Elms Works was replaced by a completely new complex at Eastleigh, and it
was at the latter where the final ten Drummond tanks were completed.
The engines were designated ‘’M7’’, which derived from the alphanumerical order
number of the early batches at Nine Elms Works. When the first ‘’M7’’ Tanks
entered service in March 1897, the LSWR’s suburban locomotive fleet had reached
saturation point. There already existed a large number of relatively new tank
engines on commuter workings, procured under the leadership of Drummond’s
predecessor, William Adams. Consequently, many of the first ''M7'' engines were sent
to far-flung corners or the LSWR network, as distant as Exeter and Plymouth in
the west, and a little closer to the capital, at Bournemouth, Salisbury, and
Portsmouth.
The fifty locomotives built from 1903 onwards featured frames 15-inches longer
than earlier batches; this produced a long front overhang, under which an air
reservoir was eventually fitted. In addition, engines prior to 1903 were
equipped with a lever reverser, whilst later batches were fitted with a steam
reverser. Post-1903 engines were also fitted with a feed-water heater. The
latter was simply used to pre-heat the water before it went to the main boiler.
Drummond’s past involvement in Scottish railways was reflected by the
incorporation of deep-toned organ pipe whistles, as found on engines of the CR.
This was, however, a short-lived feature which was soon replaced. A second
Drummond innovation that had brief use on these engines was the spark arrestor.
The first batch of 25 engines were equipped with a complicated arrestor system,
which filled up the firebox with a series of hoods and deflecting plates. The
spark arrestor was there to prevent burning embers and sparks from escaping
through the chimney, where they could pose a fire risk. The size of the spark
arrestor required a conical smokebox door to be fitted to engines, but
subsequent builds without this cumbersome set-up were equipped with flatter
doors.
An early incident involving an ‘’M7’’ Tank occurred on 6th March 1898, when No.
252 suddenly left the rails two miles north of Tavistock station, Devon. It was
hauling the 5:30 PM Exeter to Plymouth service at an estimated 40 MPH. Trailing
the engine were seven vehicles (a covered carriage truck; two third class
carriages; two guard’s vans; two bogie composites), which also derailed, and the
formation came to a stop after travelling 210 yards through the ballast. There
were no injuries to passengers or the crew, but the carriages sustained slight
damage; in addition, the engine had its brake gear torn off. A Board of Trade
report concluded that the cause of the accident was obscure and no single
explanation for it was forthcoming. It was noted that the locomotive was brand
new in June 1897, the carriages had recently been overhauled, and the route
itself was of recent origin, too. No faults were detected in the engine’s wheels
or springs during examination after the incident. However, previous experience
had shown that whilst these engines were good hill climbers, they became
unstable at speed when travelling downhill with slack couplings, and had a
severe effect on the track. Given that the train had been travelling downhill,
it was suspected that it had been running at a speed far greater than the 40 MPH
quoted by the driver.
Displacement and a Curious Rebuild
In 1913, the LSWR announced electrification of its suburban lines as far out as
Guildford, via Woking, Cobham, and Epsom, using the 600 Volt D.C. third rail
system. In addition, Hampton Court and Shepperton branches were to be similarly
treated, as were the Kingston and Hounslow Loops. The opening and
electrification of the Piccadilly and District Lines respectively, combined with
the spread of tramways, had seen patronage of LSWR suburban services drop
significantly. Electrification was seen as the only way forward, and electric
services commenced on the majority of the aforementioned routes as follows:
Waterloo to Wimbledon via East Putney: 25th October 1915
Kingston Loop: 30th January 1916
Shepperton Branch: 30th January 1916
Hounslow Loop: 12th March 1916
Hampton Court Branch: 18th June 1916
Hampton Court Junction to Claygate: 20th November 1916
Naturally, this eradicated much steam from the LSWR suburban area, but the
Windsor Line remained unconverted and indeed, no further electrification took
place until after the Grouping. Drummond’s Tanks became increasingly used for
branch line duties; for this, from 1912, engines started being equipped with
apparatus for push-pull working. As the name suggests, this enabled locomotives
to push or pull their carriages (which had to be similarly modified) in service,
and negated an engine run-a-round manoeuvre at the end of a journey. The driver
was situated at least a carriage length away from the engine, but in the cab of
the trailer could be found a duplicate regulator handle, which allowed the
movement of the locomotive to be controlled.
Later systems had the duplicate handle connected to the regulator in the engine
cab by means of a shaft, which ran the length of the coach and then projected up
through the footplate, to be pinned to the handle. The early LSWR system,
however, devised by Drummond, involved a more primitive cable and pulley system.
Wires ran along the boiler between the chimney and dome, and just under half the
class were so modified. Until completion of the suburban electrification scheme
by the Southern Railway, a push-pull service was maintained between Claygate and
Guildford.
On 8th November 1912, Drummond died at age 72 at his home in Morven, Surbiton,
as a result of tragic and unusual circumstances. He had sustained severe burns
as a result of scalding his feet with boiling water. The burns, left untreated,
then transformed into gangrene, which in turn required amputation. Drummond
opted out of an anaesthetic and consequently died of shock. He was replaced by
Robert Urie, who had originally joined the LSWR in 1897 as Works Manager at Nine
Elms, after a move from the Caledonian Railway. Urie was a respected all-round
locomotive engineer, and although noted as less autocratic than his predecessor,
remained a formidable character among the foreman at Eastleigh Works. He had
earlier held the post of Chief Draughtsman on the CR. Urie remained as CME until
the 1923 Grouping, during which time he undertook a rebuild of ‘’M7’’ Tank No.
126. In 1921, this engine was equipped with enlarged cylinders and a superheated
boiler, featuring an elongated smokebox and a Urie stovepipe chimney.
Reportedly, the rebuild produced an engine which consumed less coal and water
than its classmates, but at the cost of raising the centre of gravity to make
high-speed running unstable. In addition, oil usage was also unusually high, and
the engine was deemed too heavy for many of the LSWR’s suburban lines. As a
result, No. 126 was confined to the role of Waterloo station pilot, and hauled
empty carriage stock between Waterloo and Clapham Junction Carriage Sidings. The
results from the experiment put a stop to rebuilding a further twenty examples
in the same fashion.
In 1920, ‘’M7’’ Tanks started to receive enlarged coalbunkers. When new, these
engines could hold 3-tons of coal, but modification resulted in bunkers being heightened by
the addition of extra metal rails, raising capacity by half a ton.
Southern Railway Takeover
The LSWR was absorbed into the Southern Railway on Grouping in 1923, accompanied
by the neighbouring LB&SCR and SE&CR. At this time Urie retired, and Richard
Maunsell, a former SE&CR man, was appointed as the first CME of the SR. It was
during this period that steam took a rather secondary role, the SR Board being
preoccupied with electrification. On the South Western Section, public electric
trains reached Dorking North and Guildford on 12th July 1925, and the Windsor
lines, too, became electrically worked on 6th July 1930.
The ‘’M7s’’were the largest single class of tank engine to be inherited by the
SR, and under this company’s auspices their operational scope increased. The
LSWR numbering series was retained, but between 1923 and 1928 an ‘’E’’ prefix
was displayed in front of the number (simply denoting ‘’Eastleigh’’). Several of
the type were cascaded to the Central Division which, in spite of the
electrification mania of the 1930s, still retained large pockets of
un-electrified railway. Typically, they were employed on push-pull branch
services, featuring on those rural lines around Oxted and Tunbridge Wells West.
The early Drummond cable and pulley push-pull system was vastly improved upon,
given a series of malfunctions that led to the equipment’s removal from engines.
Push-pull workings could be found on LMS and GWR systems (being known as
‘’auto-trains’’ on the latter), but it was perhaps on the SR network where they
were most abundant. From 1929 onwards, ‘’M7’’ Tanks started being fitted with a
compressed air system for such trains. This involved attaching a Westinghouse
pump to the right-hand side of the smokebox, a regulator-operating cylinder in
front of the water tank on the same side, a back-pressure cylinder on top of the
same tank, and finally, a large air reservoir underneath the long front overhang
of the frames. The compressed air was required to work the locomotive’s
regulator when the train was being driven from the cab of a trailer. The
back-pressure cylinder was there as a safety device, keeping a reserve of
low-pressure air constantly exerted on the underside of the piston in the
regulator-operating cylinder. Thus, should an air supply failure occur (i.e. due
to a broken pipe), this reserve pressure would be enough to return the piston up
in the cylinder and shut the regulator. The Westinghouse pump was driven by
steam from the boiler and, should too low a pressure be detected in an air
reservoir elsewhere on the tank engine, the pump cut in and puffed away until
the pressure had been restored to the required level.
In May 1937, unique ‘’M7’’ No. 126, the Urie rebuild, was withdrawn from service
as a non-standard engine. It was dismantled and many of its components re-used
to maintain the rest of the ‘’M7’’ fleet, notably No. 254, which receive its
long frames. In the following November, Oliver Bulleid replaced Richard Maunsell
as CME of the SR.
British Railways: The Twilight Years
Of the 105 ‘’M7’’ Tank Engines built, all but one member, No. 126, were absorbed
into British Railways ownership in January 1948. SR modifications to date had
included the fitting of compressed air push-pull gear to around thirty members
of the fleet, and the addition of plating within the rails of the coalbunker, to
prevent small lumps of coal from escaping. A second engine of the class, No.
672, had a BR career of just 3½-months. On 13th April 1948, the engine propelled
four loaded coal wagons onto the hydraulic hoist of the Waterloo & City line at
the London terminus. The lift began to fall and took all four wagons and the
engine with it, the latter’s driver and fireman jumping clear. The coal wagons
were smashed up at the foot of the lift shaft and the engine landed on them
upside down. No. 672 was dismantled in situ and its parts used as spares for the
rest of the fleet.
General withdrawals commenced in 1957, with No. 30042 disappearing in June of
that year. At this time, the type was spread throughout the Southern Region,
allocated to every ‘’A’’ shed bar those of the South Eastern Division. Their
demise gathered a pace thereafter, and in 1959 ‘’M7s’’ were ousted from Waterloo
pilot duties. They were replaced by a mixture of 0-6-0 WR Pannier and BR
Standard 2-6-4 Tanks. On the advent of the 1960s, push-pull workings
were rapidly decreasing as branch lines completely lost their services or, for
those which retained trains, were dieselised. By May 1964 just nine ‘’ M7’’
Tanks remained in service, all of which were withdrawn during that month. Of the
entire fleet of M7 engines which remained in existence, No. 30245 was the
eldest, having been completed in April 1897 and withdrawn over 65-years later,
in November 1962. As a result, it was selected for preservation as part of the
National Collection. A second ‘’M7’’, No. 30053, was also cherry-picked for
preservation, this time privately. It was one of the last nine of the type to be
withdrawn in May 1964, and had been in service since December 1905. After a
period of sitting out in the cold at Eastleigh, the engine was cosmetically
restored and shipped to the United States in April 1967, for exhibition at
Steamtown USA, Scranton, Pennsylvania. There it remained for twenty years, out
in the open, the sun bleaching its paintwork and leaving the humble tank engine
in a very sorry state. Happily, it was purchased by the Drummond Locomotive
Society in 1987, and in that year returned to Britain. After a thorough
restoration, it once again moved under its own power on the Swanage Railway,
Dorset.
30055
Engulfed in its own smoke and steam, ''M7'' No. 30055 is seen propelling a push-pull service away from Rowfant,
West Sussex, on 21st February 1960. The Central Division line to Tunbridge Wells West became a regular haunt of
these ex-LSWR engines. At the time of this photograph, No. 30055 was allocated to Brighton (75A). It was withdrawn
from service in September 1963, and the closure of its engine shed to steam occurred in the following year.
© David Glasspool Collection
30111
The huge water tank of Nine Elms forms the backdrop of this view depicting ''M7'' No. 30111. This was one of
the ''long frame'' class members - note the lengthy overhang at the front of the engine. No. 30111 was in fact
a Bournemouth-allocated engine in its final days, and was withdrawn from that depot in January 1964. In the
above view, it is seen paired with a BR Standard 3MT 2-6-2 Tank, the latter of which complemented the ''M7''
Tanks on Waterloo pilot duties. © David Glasspool Collection
Return to the Kent Rail Homepage or alternatively, check for Updates.
Website & Copyright information - Links - Contact the Webmaster
All content is copyright © David Glasspool