0-6-0 Steam Locomotives in Great Britain

Class 1001 (Locobase 9640)

Data from G W J Potter, A History of the Whitby & Pickering Railway (London: The Locomotive Publishing Co, Ltd, 1906), p. ("Net Price - Half-A-Crown").

This design came from William Bouch when he served as Locomotive Superintendent of the S & D. Like the Longboilers, this engine had all three of its axles placed ahead of the firebox. "The wheel base is thereby shortened, " explained Potter, "and produces a more suitable engine for traversing curves. This scheme also permits of a large firebox being employed, and ample heating surface thereby ensured." Potter notes that others in the class had larger boilers (1,444 sq ft) and slightly larger fireboxes (94.8 sq ft).

Class 176 (Locobase 10314)

Data from "Early Stockton & Darlington Locomotives", The Locomotive Magazine,Vol VIII (9 May 1903), p. 321

William Bouch reacted to the increasing demands for power of the mineral-traffic variety by drafting plans for a larger, more potent locomotive. "The writer well remembers, " LM's writer tells us,"the concensus [sic] of admiration they caused on their arrival at Darlington from the builder's works, and the curiosity and interest shown by the officials and men of other lines on their arrival at the several 'foreign' junctions."

A smokebox feedwater heater had what amounted to water cells that held water fed by the top of the stack, which had a sleeve inside the outer casing. Heat came from the inner smokebox and from exhaust steam. The water was fed by the right-hand pump.

Overall, the class performed up to expectations and were modified over time to more closely resemble the 1001 class (Locobase 9640).

Class Commerce (Locobase 10259)

Data from "Early Stockton & Darlington Locomotives", The Locomotive Magazine,Vol VIII (24 Jan 1903), p.61

Another William Bouch long-boilered design, this one had a very odd crosshead and coupling rod layout. Because the coupling rod needed to avoid interfering with the lead crank pin, it was produced with a large eye in it (like that in a needle). To manage the rod, the crosshead guides had to be no less than 30" apart. Sounds like a jury rig to Locobase, one that goes with the valve motion, which Locobase doesn't quite get even after a few tries.

Like the Shildon batch of 6, however, these engines remained in service for years and one appeared at the 50th anniversary celebration in 1875.

Class Hippopotamus (Locobase 7539)

Data from [], last accessed 10 June 2006. See also "No. 1001 Class Engines, North Eastern Ry", Locomotive Magazine, Volume XXII [22] (5 January 1916), p. 25. Works numbers were 704-713 in 1874.

William Bouch's long-boilered design continued in production for the S & D for more than 20 years and over time saw several variants; see Locobase 3009 for the history of this design. This example represents one of the last batches delivered from Dubs (works #707) in 1874.

According to Marsden, the 1001s were the principal ore-train engines for many years. As late as 1906, they were still in heavy use in the Loftus area scaling quite severe grades.

Class Hippopotamus (Locobase 20532)

Data from "No. 1001 Class Engines, North Eastern Ry", Locomotive Magazine, Volume XXII [22] (5 January 1916), p. 25. Works numbers were 704-713 in 1874.

As noted in Locobases 3009 and 7539, William Bouch's long-boilered design continued in production for the S&D for more than 20 years and over time saw several variants; see Locobase 3009 for the history of this design.

This was one of the very last batches and its data do not match those given for the Dubs engines delivered in the same year.

Regardless of builder, the class proved very durable with six (including three from Avonside) still in service in 1915.

Class Royal George (Locobase 645)

Data from E L Ahrons, The British Steam Locomotive from 1825 to 1925 (London: Ian Allan, 1927), p. 5. See also J G Warren's criticism of an earlier encomium celebrating Timothy Hackworth in hs 18 December 1925, Locomotive Magazine, Volume XXXII [32], No 407 (15 January 1926), pp. 14-15.

The first six-coupled locomotive, designed by Timothy Hackworth, and one of the first locomotives with a blast pipe in the stack to increase the draft over the fire. Warren contested every contention in the previous sentence, while allowing that Hackworth "indeed his statue [sic-stature?] as a railway pioneer who accompished a task of great difficulty ...a designer who added a definite link in the chain of of locomotive improvement."

The base of this engine was an unsuccessful two-axle (coupled with chains) with 4 cylinders built by Robert Wilson of Leeds and nicknamed Chittaprat. Hackworth used the boiler, eliminated all the intermediary drive gear, and suspended the two leading axles under longitudinal leaf springs.

In this form, Royal George could pull 24 wagons totalling 93-100 tons and had a max capacity of 130 tons at 5 mph. A second engine, Victory, was identical in all respects.

Class Shildon (Locobase 3200)

Data from "Early Stockton & Darlington Locomotives", The Locomotive Magazine,Vol VIII (24 Jan 1903), p.61

William Bouch's long-boilered design, one of the first of the type, had outside cylinders, which "combined with the very short wheelbase ...accentuated the inherent unsteadiness of the [long-boiler] type." (Glover, 1967). The author of the Locomotive Magazine article cites the "absurdly small" grate area.

The engines, unusually, had leading tender and trailing tenders.

Class Tornado (Locobase 16109)

Data from drawing archived at [], last accessed 27 July 2015. Works numbers were 365-364 in 1854.

These were identical to the two saddle tanks delivered by Vulcan to the Vale of Neath Railway in the same year.

Class unknown (Locobase 3009)

Data from E L Ahrons, The British Steam Locomotive from 1825 to 1925 (London: Ian Allan, 1926); Graham Glover, British Locomotive Design 1825-1960 (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1967); and Southern E-Group's website at [] (visited November 2002). Works numbers were 1074-1079

William Bouch's long-boilered design featured a flat-top firebox similar to that of the Belpaire, but without the square corners as the top of the firebox was below the boiler line. Of interest is the huge tube cross-section/grate ratio, which underscores the small grate behind a relatively large boiler.

These would seem to have been short-winded locomotives, difficult to keep in steam, but Marsden points out that much of their duty time was spent waiting for tasks. Once in motion, the engines would travel relatively short distance. A loitering locomotive with a small grate wouldn't use up a large boilerful of steam and thus was a more economical locomotive.

These Hawthorns were named Panther, Ostrich, Leopard, Zebra, Fox, and Mastiff.

Ahrons and Glover agree about the importance of this freight engine, but do not give specifications. Perhaps the biggest reason is the variety of sub-types, with Glover representing the very first batch and Ahrons a later variety. For example, William Worsdell's replacement boilers offering a larger firebox with a larger grate --13.3 sq ft (1.24 sq m)-- and a larger-diameter (51"/1.295 mm) boiler with 26 fewer tubes.

See Locobase 7539 for an example delivered by Dubs in 1874.

Class unknown (Locobase 21025)

Data from "Goods Locomotive, Stockton and Darlington Railway", Engineering, Volume 14 (30 August 1872), pp. 150-151, 156.

William Bouch's long-boilered design continued in production for the S & D for more than 20 years and over time saw several variants; see Locobase 3009 for the history of this design.

The batch shown in this entry featured what Dredge & Maw conceded was "an unusually long stroke" of 28". All motion was inside the plates, which were themselves inside the driving wheels. The three axles lay forward of the firebox with the front axle 30" further forward of the middle axle than the rear axle behind.

The dome sat just behind the chimney to increase the weight on the leading drivers and to strengthen the boiler by placing the cut for the dome just behind the tube plate. Longer safety valve balances allowed the boiler to release surplus steam "in time to prevent overpressure." The firebox had a longitudinal midfeather, sliding double doors, and was stayed from the flat outer box to the inner box creating a "much stronger arrangement than ...roof ribs" while putting 3/4 of a ton less weight on the trailing axle.

A complex feed water systen included concentric outer and inner tubes, the outer one being filled with feed water which dripped down to emerge from a ring of tiny holes. Engineering claimed the "arrangement works very well and has given no trouble. It has especial advantages for engines making long runs, and the saving effected is found to amount to about 5 per cent. of fuel." (Locobase wonders how long that remained true before what seem to be inevitable leaks compromised the setup.)