| GWR 8000 Cathedral Class | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
Some writers claim that a Great Western Railway (GWR) 8000 or Cathedral Class was a proposed class of 4-6-2 steam locomotives. This locomotive class would have been the GWR's second attempt at designing a 4-6-2 locomotive, following No. 111 The Great Bear. [1] [2] [3] Other sources state that this was never any more than a speculative study by the GWR Chief Draughtsman, Mattingley, and had no connection to Frederick Hawksworth, who cancelled the study when he heard about it. [4] Both the name "Cathedral" and the number series 8000 appear to be inventions by enthusiasts and were never attached to the Mattingley study.
The first mention of 'Cathedral' as a potential name for a GWR class came during Collett's development of the 'Super-Castle' class in late 1926 or early 1927. According to the writer OS Nock, it was known in Swindon, and even published in the local newspapers, that the new class would be 'Cathedrals', [5] [6] but this rumour probably originated in a humorous article in the local newspaper at the time. [7] In the event, with the GWR invited to send a locomotive to the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Centenary celebrations, Felix Pole realised that a 'Cathedral' would not impress the Americans, and gained the agreement of King George V that the first locomotive of the class would be named after him, and the rest after previous monarchs. Thus the King Class naming was adopted. [8] [9]
There was a proposal for a 4-6-2 locomotive from the Swindon drawing office in the mid 1940s. Different sources, even the same source at different dates, differ on when and who originated this. Griffiths [1] claims that a Hawksworth was "Consumed by one abiding passion, the production of a Pacific", and that he initiated a project for one when he became Chief Mechanical Engineer in 1941. This is not borne out, indeed it is flatly contradicted, by other sources. According to Griffiths this project was vetoed by government control of the railways. Griffiths goes on to say that Hawksworth revived this project at the end of hostilities. Various sources agree that a design study for a 4-6-2 was commenced about that time, but others, notably Summers, [10] claim that this study was initiated by F. C. Mattingley, the chief draughtsman, without Hawksworth's involvement. All these writers claim to be relying on conversations with various drawing office staff, and none of them mention anything formally recorded in official documents.
All that survives in the GWR archives at the NRM is a packet of calculations signed by H. Tichener. This proposes a wide firebox boiler. [11] However there is also in existence a diagram created by Mr. L. Ward of the RCTS, which is stated to be based on GWR drawings. The GWR drawings no longer exist. One cannot know how many of the features of the drawing are original, and how many interpretations by Mr Ward, but it is published widely, notably in the RCTS series. [12] It shows a locomotive which appears to have a chassis developed from the King Class 4-6-0s, with the same cylinder and wheel dimensions and the same 250 psi (1.7 MPa) boiler pressure. The boiler is rather different from GWR conventions though, most notably featuring a steam dome. [3]
It seems certain that this proposal never got as far as being presented to GWR directors. [13] There are stories that Hawksworth destroyed the original GWR drawings with his own hands in the early 1960s and that he stated the GWR had no need for such a locomotive. Nock tells us that after initiating work on the project with his team Mattingley had it abruptly halted, but there is only speculation as to the reasons. [14]