Sir William Arthur Stanier, FRS

Sir William Arthur Stanier, FRS

46238 City of Carlisle leaving Glasgow Central on the Royal Scot in 1961 (KPJ)

"Stanier was big in stature and in mind ..." This brief quotation from 's Locomotive panorama v. 1 gives some indication of a man whose greatness lay in his powers of self-criticism and willingness to express his debt to others work. Lowe noted that Stanier's task of great magnitude required "both tact and strong leadership. Stanier had both".

Stanier has been well served by biographers, although no single work does him full justice. The most important works are Cox's Locomotive panorama, plus E.S. Cox's and K.J. Cook's obituaries presented to the Institution of Locomotive Engineers (Jounal No. 305), Hartley's Royal Society obituary, Bulleid's "Master builders of steam , Bellwood and Jenkinson's assessment of Gresley and Stanier, Nock's "Sir William Stanier now largely superceded by Chacksfield's Sir William Stanier aptly sub-titled "new biography". Locomotive panorama (v. 1) is the most exhaustive account of Stanier's design work. It also shows his personal qualities as viewed by a subordinate. Hartley's obituary is, perhaps, a more intimate account as it is written from the viewpoint of a colleague (Sir Harold Hartley was in charge of research activities on the LMS) who was instrumental in attracting Stanier away from Swindon. Much of the material in H.A.V .Bulleid's book has clearly come from his father's (O.V.S. Bulleid) memories. Nock's personal knowledge is of a lesser order and he tends to concentrate on Stanier's locomotives with emphasis on performance. Extensive verbatim quotations from Stanier's papers form a major feature of the work. Chacksfield was well-received, but like its companion biographies of Fowler and Collett suffers from a lack of a thorough examination of the subjects' published work. Nevertheless, with all these volumes it is probable that no remaining personal material relating to the subject remains unexplored, and Chacksfield is successful in capturing the nature of the man.

Bellwood and Jenkinson's Gresley and Stanier should not be overlooked as Bellwood was a fully trained Locomotive Engineer. They succinctly observe that unlike Gresley: "Stanier was not really an inventor. Unlike Gresley, no patents stand to his name and his real strength lay in a knowledge of current techniques and an ability to put them into practice to give the best return, taking all factors into account".

Stanier's papers are of a great importance due to his self-critical approach. They cover a wide area of study which included materials, testing and design. After retirement he continued to attend meetings of the Locomotive Engineers and his comments on papers tended to be kind. He often reminisced about his own work, whilst he never forgot his debt to Churchward, as shown by his Newcomen Society address—this paper is of great importance in that reveals much about the author. By the time it was written Stanier was retired, and whilst his earlier professional papers were probably written with a great deal of assistance from his subordinates (this is common practice in all industries), it is likely that his contribution on Churchward was written solely by his own effort. Reference should also be made to the more extensive (in time) bibliography contained in Hartley's obituary. Examination of the early Transactions of the Institution of Locomotive Engineers showed that Stanier's witty, easy style during discussion sessions was evident as early as 1913: see his penetrating remarks following a paper by Lawford Fry..

Patents
418,428. Improvements in or relating to the bodies of railway passenger carriages, and similar vehicles. with John Purves and Paul Lewis Henderson. Applied 28 May 1934. Published 24 October 1934.
441,661 An electro-magnetically operated slide valve, in a sealed chest, having no external moving parts, for controlling the flow of steam or other gases under pressure with George Vickers and Frederick William Hicklenton. Applied 18 February 1935. Published 23 January 1936.
481,115 Improvements in and connected with shunting humps for railway sidings with Thomas Frederick Bell Simpson. Applied 4 September 1936. Published 4 March 1938.
490,076. Improvements in cable haulage appliances for moving railway vehicles with William Alexander Lyall. Applied 5 April 1937. Published 9 August 1938.
490,967 Improvements in and connected with portable lifting jacks with Paul Lewis Henderson. Applied 25 June 1937. Published 24 August 1938.
492,197 Improvements in and connected with signal control arrangements for railway depots and the like with Frederick Stanton Barnes and Paul Lewis Henderson. Applied 3 April 1937. Published 16 September 1938
553,542. Improvements in or appertaining to riveting hammers wiith Herbert Greaves and George Thomas Smithyman. Applied 21 Novcember 1941. Published 26 May 1943.

Own papers

Recent developments in locomotive design. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1936, 26, 533-94. 21 illus., 8 diagrs. (Presidential Address).
In this paper Stanier declared his debt to Churchward. In the subsequent vote of thanks Gresley echoed Stanier's appreciation.

The development and testing of locomotives. Engineering, 1936, 142, 305-8. illus., 9 diagrs., table.
Abridgement of a paper presented to the British Association (Section G) at Blackpool on 1936-09-11..

Engine lubrication (reciprocation steam engines). Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs,, 1937, 136, 139-43.

Engine lubrication (reciprocating engines) [in]:
INSTITUTION of Mechanical Engineers.
Proceedings of the general discussion on lubrication & lubricants. v. 1. London, Institution of Mechanical Enginers, [1938].
See pp. 614-18, plus pp. 619-48 for the discussion.

George Jackson Churchward, Chief Mechanical Engineer, Great Western Railway. Trans. Newcomen Soc., 1960, 30,1-8. Disc.: 8-12 + 4 plates. 4 illus. (incl. port.), 3 diagrs.

The heat-treatment of locomotive parts. Proc. Instn mech. Engrs, 1929, (2), 1069-73. 10 illus., diagr.
Swindon practice.

Lightweight passenger rolling stock. J. Proc. Instn mech. Engrs., 1939, 143, 13.
This reference is due to Moon (J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1947, 37 (Paper 469)

Locomotive development on the Great Western Railway. Rly Mag., 1931, 68, 294-9. 15 illus.
Brief report of a talk given by Stanier to the Great Western Railway (London) Lecture and Debating Society.

Lubrication and lubricants as applied to locomotive reciprocating engines. [in:]
INSTITUTION of Mechanical Engineers.
Proceedings of the general discussion on lubrication & lubricants. v. 1 London, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, [1938].
See pp. 614-18, plus pp. 619-48 for the discussion.

Lubrication as applied to locomotive journals [in]:
INSTITUTION of Mechanical Engineers.
Proceedings of the general discussion on lubrication & lubricants. v. 1. London, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, [1938].
See pp. 302-8 plus general discussion pp. 355-87 (illus., diagr., table.).

A pageant of railroad engineering. Proc. Instn mech. Engrs, 1928, 114, 495-8.
Impressions of United States locomotives gained when Stanier accompanied a King class locomotive to the Baltimore & Ohio Centenary celebrations: Address delivered at Western Branch in Bristol on 8th December 1927..

The position of the locomotive in mechanical engineering. Proc. Instn mech. Engrs, 1941, 146, 50-61 + 4 plates. 13 illus., diagr., 3 tables. (Presidential Address).
A review of the efficiency of the steam locomotive, based on L.M.S. testing plus a forecast of future development

Problems connected with locomotive design. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1939, 29, 13-33 + 6 folding plates. 2 illus., 13 diagrs. (Presidential Address).

Recent developments in locomotive design. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1936, 26, 553-94 + folding plate. 21 illus., 8 diagrs., (Presidential Address).
A review of world development. Amongst topics covered are the turbomotive, continuous blow-down and the Gresley A4 and P2 classes. It is in this address that Stanier declares his debt to Churchward.. Stanier also observed that 'streamlining may be something like that blessed word "Mesopotamia" to the old lady. At any rate it has good publicity value.'.

Some features connected with locomotive development. Rly Gaz., 1943, 78, 368.
A note on an address presented to the City & Guilds College Engineering Society. The paper reviewed basic design considerations.

Welding in British railways (mechanical engineering) [in]
IRON and Steel Institute
Symposium on the welding of iron and steel. v. 1. London, Iron and Steel Institute, 1935.
See pp. 349-56 pius pp. 409-26 and 424-5 (discussion) (36 illus.)

Contributions to the discussion on other's papers

Alcock, J.F. Locomotive limits and fits. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1949, 39, Disc.: 505-8. (Paper No. 487)
Sir William Stanier (505-8) noted that locomotive manufacturers in the United Kingdom had now adopted a universal system which he regarded to be of great importance. He noted that he had seen Lelean working out the limits and fits for the Indian Government Railways. He also acknowledged the work performed in this area at Horwich. He noted that earson, when on the GWR had encountered troublle with fractures in carriage axles this was due to moisture getting in where the axles were pressed into the wheel. The LMS had trouble with crankpins. Stanier himself had been responsible for the burnishing broach having seen it in the USA in 1927. He observed that Collett had sought to introduce parallel crankpins and this had led to many breakages. Also included an extract on press fits from a paper presented by H.J. Shrader to ASME in 1948.

Bond, R.C.
Ten years' experience with the L.M.S. 4-6-2 non-condensing turbine locomotive, No.6202. J. lnstn Loco. Engrs, 1946, 36, 182-230. Disc.: 231-65 + 10 folding plates. 4 illus., 20 diagrs. (incl. 4 s.els.),, 10 tables. (Paper No. 458).
Pp. 231.3: Stanier's comments showed his professional modesty: lesser men would have placed their name on such a paper by a subordinate. He noted his error in using a low degree of superheating at first on the LMS and how the original suggestion for a turbine locomotive came from Dr. Guy of Metropolitan Vickers.
Bond, R.C.
Organisation and control of locomotive repairs on British Railways. J. Instn Loco Engrs., 1953, 43, pages 218-19. (Paper No. 520)
Noted Beames' contribution to efficiency at Crewe Works by instigating the new erecting shop opened in 1924.

Cox, E.S.
Balancing of locomotive reciprocating parts. J. lnstn Loco. Eng 1942, 32, 2-37. Disc.:1943, 33, 218-36. 4 illus,, 11 diagrs., 3 tables. (Paper 432).
Pp. 218-19: noted that for many years locomotive engineers had lacked adequate means for measuring various things they did also notes on an experiment with a 2-6-4T without reciprocating balances.

British standard locomotives. J. lnstn Loco. Engrs, 1951, 41, 287-335. Disc.: 336-403 + 5 folding plates. 22 illus., 20 diagrs., 7 tables. (Paper No. 502).
Pp. 337-8: general warm comment.

Locomotive axleboxes J. lnstn Loco. Engrs, 1944, 34, 275-317. Discussion: 317-40:1945, 35, 221-38:1946, 36, 171-6+ 3 folding plates. 21 diagrs., 8 tables. (Paper No. 447).
general comment.

Dymond, A.W.J. Operating experience with two gas turbine locomotives. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1953, 43, 292-3. (Paper No. 521)
Sir William Stamer, F.R.S. (Past President) felt that his remarks would perhaps cover two fields, he having been brought up as a steam man and now being tarred with the gas turbine brush. The Author, he said, had put before the Institution a paper which was an extraordinarily able record of the work which had been done on gas turbine locomotives in this country. It was factual and the Author had not indulged too much in prophecy, leaving that to the gas turbine people who were undoubtedly represented in the audience.

It must be remembered that the two locomotives in question had been conceived six years ago. Much had been learned about gas turbines, their design and pressures and combustion systems, since that time; but, although so much had been learned, very little "ironmongery" had yet been made to prove the techniques which had been developed. The two locomotives described in the Paper were actual "ironmongery" and had achieved results and that was important.

He felt that those concerned with the gas turbine had to realise that gas turbines used for traction purposes as locomotives or in lorries, buses or tanks had to have different features from the gas turbines which were developed for marine purposes or for stationary power plant. He had always been struck by the fact that if for the gas turbine one plotted power output against efficiency (Fig. 10) one obtained a curve of the type shown by the full line showing the most efficient conditions at about 80 per cent of the power output. What was wanted for the locomotive was a curve of the type shown by the dotted line. It might fall off considerably at over 50 per cent load, but so long as the locomotive would start the train and take it uphill that was what was wanted, and most of the work would be done in the region A-B. If the greatest efficiency of the gas turbine was between 25 and 30 per cent load it would be a much more efficient locomotive.

The Author did not seem to be quite fair to the steam locomotive in comparing its fuel consumption with that of the gas turbine. The gas turbine figures were principally on passenger work, but the figures for coal related to general railway work, passenger and goods. It would have been a very much better comparison to take the coal consumption of the" King" link at Old Oak.

A point of interest was that the Western Region seemed to be able to arrange, when they had experimental units, to confine the working of them to a comparatively small number of men. On the LMS there had been a steam turbine locomotive, and, although he had asked the operating side to keep it to two or three sets of men, it had in fact been worked by twenty in turn. It was impossible to run an experimental engine in that way, and he thought that the Western Region were very fortunate in that respect.

Ell, S.O.
Developments in locomotive testing. J.Instn Loco. Engrs, 1953, 43, 561-91. Disc.: 591-633; 729-34 + 4 folding plates. 2 illus., 19 diagrs. Bibliog. (Paper No. 527).
Based on tests with King class 6001: Pp 591-2: "A thing which had puzzled him [Stanier] for a long time, having ridden on many engines, was whether the right practice was to notch up as soon as possible and have a full regulator, or whether to let the gear out a bit and ease it on the regulator".

Fry, Lawford H.
Modern locomotive practice in Europe and America. Trans Instn Loco. Engrs., 1913, 3, 41-58. Disc.: 59-73. (Paper No. 16)
Stanier (63-4) noted the existence of the Churchward 2-8-0 and 2-8-0T on the GWR. The leading coupled wheels of the 42XX type had spherical crank pins and bushes to prove 2½in side play: this enabled the class to operate over sharp curves at collieries. Stanier noted that the 4-cylinder layout distributed the working stress "very nicely". Refering to the 43XX he called the mixed reaffic locomotive the "engine of the future" noting that is was suitable for working excursion trafic and troop trains.

Gammon, C.A.
Standardisation and design of goods and mineral wagons as applied to British Railways. J. Instn Loco. Engrs. 1950, 40, 425-65. Disc.: 466-85. (Paper No. 496)
Pp. 467-8): When he was on the Great Western Railway, the late Churchward built a 40 ton bogie coal wagon, but he found that the tare of the 40 ton-wagon was greater than the tare of two 20-ton wagons, and it was very restricted in the places it could serve, and so naturally he built 20-ton wagons. On the Cornish Riviera Limited they had measured the quantity of oil placed into the axleboxes, and the sealed boxes were run for eleven months - care was taken to examine the boxes adjacent to the engine to ensure that water had not breached the dust shields. Queried the change to oil-hardened plates from water-hardened: danger of mixing the two.
Graff-Baker, W.S. Considerations on bogie design with particular reference to electric railways. J. Instn Loco Engrs., 1952, 42, 339-40. (Paper 513)
Opened the discussion and sung the praises of the Dean bogie.
Gresley, H.N.
High-pressure locomotives. Proc. Instn Mech, Engrs., 1931, 120, 101-35. Disc.:135-206
Stanier (pp 140-1) queried the amount of heat reaching the outer tubes.

Jarvis, R.G.
The railways and coal. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1952, 42, 390-404. Disc.: 404-24: 1953, 43,724-9. Bibliog. (Paper No. 515).
Pp. 404-5: Stanier commented on the little gain in thermal efficiency from the use of the exhaust steam injector.

Lund, G.H.K.
Railway breakdown and rerailing equipment. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1950, 40, 270-1. (Paper No. 493)
pp 270-1: Stanier observed that 12 ton cranes were the highest capacity when he first had to deal with problem. Hydraulic jacks had assisted. In 1910 36 ton capacity cranes became available: a Ransomes & Rapier machine at Swindon and a Stothert & Pitt crane at Old Oak Common. In 1927 when in the USA he had come across the Lidgerwood steam winch.

Lynes, L. and Shephard, C.A. Southern Railway all-steel suburban electric stock. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1948, 38, 205-38. Disc. 238-57. 24 diagrs. (Paper No. 474)
Stanier (238-9) commented on the transmission losses with electricity, and the many other reductions that it was necessary to make. He thought that the Paper showed the trend of coach design in this country, and that they were gradually getting towards all-steel stock. He supported C.M. Cock's remarks about the saving in coal per ton of reduction of coach weight. Mr. Fairburn said some years ago that if it were possible to save a ton per coach he could save a year in the cost of current, which would, be a very important saving~to make. As a result, the LMS Railway built the comparatively light weight stock of the Liverpool. and Southport and Wirral railways. The Paper showed the trend of British railways towards all-steel stock, but Stanier thought that the weight of the stock was still far too heavy. The weight per coach of the stock described in the Paper was something like 35 tons, 142 tons for four coaches. If he remembered rightly, the Liverpool and Southport trailer coach weighed 22-25 tons. Mr. L. Lynes intervened to point out that in the 4-coach units described in the Paper the weight was 43 tons for the motor coach and 28 tons for the trailer coach; the motor bogies were heavy.

Sir William Stanier observed that even 28 tons for the trailer coach was heavier than the Liverpool and Southport stock.. He thought that the designers of new coaches ought seriously to consider how they could face the risk of corrosion and yet cut down the weight. The great problem with all-steel coaches was corrosion, and it required a very careful technique and proper ventilation between the panelling and the outside sheeting of the coach to avoid condensation forming. He believed that the British railways had realised the importance of this. He did not suggest that that was due to the recent revolution; he thought that it started some years ago. The time was getting nearer when they would have all-steel stock and be able to reduce the weight, and he looked forward to it.

Moon, A.N. Welded carriage underframes on the L.M.S. Railway. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1947, 37, 374.
Related that Fairburn had suggested to him that if they could save a ton in weight of a vehicle it would be possible to save £10 a year on [electric] current.

Rudgard, H. Organisation and carrying-out of examinations and repairs of locomotives at running sheds in relationship to locomotive performance and availability. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1947, 37, 64-123. Disc.: 124-59. (Paper No. 464)
Sir William Stanier (written communication, 132-3) noted that the organisation of the LMS motive power department differed somewhat from the organisation of the other railways, but the size of the undertaking justified to some extent the arrangements. The success of any organisation depends very much on the goodwill of those who have to administer it. On the LMS they were happy inasmuch as there was the closest collaboration between the motive power department and the chief mechanical engineer's department. But he suggested that the last paragraph on the first page of the Paper would be more correct if it were expressed somewhat as follows

It is the responsibility of the chief mechanical engineer to supply engines of the correct type to meet the requirements of the chief operating manager, and of the chief operating manager to allocate those engines so that the correct type of engine will be used to do the work required, and it is the superintendent of motive power's duty to see that these engines are maintained in good mechanical condition to work the trains, manned by well-trained and responsible enginemen at the time they are required.

When the Author refers to the method of washing out of boilers, he indicates that a pressure and quantity regulating valve is introduced between the hydrant pipe, etc., but he has not told us of the original difficulties experienced when it was found that the water pressure varied between wide limits at different sheds, and that the first essential was to ensure that the amount of water for cooling down the boiler was kept constant to ensure that a steady falling temperature was maintained. To do this it was found necessary to introduce a reducing valve between the hydrant and the control valve, so that the amount of water delivered for each position of the control valve was maintaind at a reasonably constant quantity. This is important when the cooling down of boilers working at high pressure is required.

As the late chief mechanical engineer of the LMS I would like to support wholeheartedly the excellent organisation under the "X" scheme and the standard mileage and periodical examinitions carried out by the motive power department, as I am sure It is largely due to that carefully planned organisation that the availability of the LMS engines is so good.

Under "hot bearings" the Author refers to. the importance of keeping dirt away from the journal. In my experience, provided sufficient oil is available, dirt does not in itself give a hot box but it does cut the journal and wear it away, and it is most desirable to provide means for keeping all dirt away from running surfaces, if possible.

I should like again to refer to the very happy relations that exist between the chief mechanical engineer's staff and the motive power superintendent's staff on the LMS and to re-assert the importance of correct personaliti,es to ensure the satisfactory working of any scheme.

Thompson, J.W. The taper boiler. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1936, 26, 764. (Paper 361)
Discussion: H. Chambers (763-4); . Lunt (764) and W.A. Stanier (764).

Webber, A.F. (Paper No. 378).
The proportions of locomotive boilers. J. Instn Loco. Engrs., 1937, 27, 688-725. Disc.: 726-63. 8 diagrs., 8 tables. Bibliog.
Stanier: (pp726-8) stated that he had enjoyed very much the analysis which the Author has made of our boiler problem; it has been, he thought, more complete than most of the analyses seen. As he has indicated, he has perhaps not given due weight to the firebox volume, but he has gone a long way towards endeavouring to evaluate the various bailer propartions which have been used on the engines of comparatively recent times.

It may be of some interest if I give an indication af the free areas in use on the present L.M.S. engines. As you know, Dr. Wagner indicated the importance of getting in balance the areas through the small tubes and the areas through the large flue tubes. On the Pacific" Coronation" engine the area through the small tubes is 3.23 sq. ft. and through the large tubes 3.66 sq. ft., making a total of 6.89 sq., ft. On the "5X" 3-cylinder engines the figures are 2.22 sq. ft. and 2.52 sq. ft., making a total of 4.74 sq. ft.

You will remember that in his Paper Dr. Wagner gave particulars of a boiler which had a free area through the tubes of something like 8 sq. ft. The comment of a member of my staff was that that engine would burn brickbats!

The difficulty is, of course, to obtain the free areas which you want and to maintain a balance with the grate area and the firebox volume within the load gauge from which we suffer in England.

In connection with the "5X" engines, it may interest yau to know that the L.M.S. have recently carried out some accelerated train trials between Glasgow and Leeds and Leeds and Bristol with "5X" engines. With a train weighing 300 tons, the coal consumption on that engine to do the work varied from 40 lb. per sq. ft. af grate area per hour to 100 lb. per sq. ft. of grate area per hour, which I think indicates what an extraordinarily flexible steam-raiser a locomotive boiler is. I do not advocate an engine being used to burn l00 lb. per sq. ft. of grate area per hour; I think that if we did that with some of the bigger engines we should have to put in a mechanical stoker.

The Author has referred to smokebox vacuum. It may be of interest to mention that the vacuum in the smokebox of the L.M.S. turbine locomotive with one nozzle open is just over 1 in. of water, and with two nozzles it is 2 in., so that with the maximum number of nozzles open it is 6 in.

The engine steams quite well on the fast trains between Liverpool and Euston of something like 500 tons weight. It seems to me that that is a comparatively low vacuum in the smokebox for a big boiler, when account is taken of the vacuum which the French engines are obtaining with the Kylchap blast pipe, and one of the investigations which I think that every locomotive superintendent within my memory has carried out is an investigation to endeavour to improve the vacuum in the smakebax withaut increasing, and in fact decreasing, the back pressure in the cylinders.

When I was in the drawing office, there was a drawer full of experiments which had been carried out in connection with blast pipes and smokebox arrangements, and I am sure that in the. drawing office which I now control there are similar quantities af experiments, but I do not think that even yet we have determined what is the most efficient arrangement.

The Author has referred to sinuous tubes. One af the difficulties in a locomotive is to keep the tubes clean, and there are quite enough difficulties at present in keeping a flue tube with a superheater element in it clean af smokebox ash and soot. The old dodge af the driver of putting a little sand on a shovel and putting it in the firehole door to scour the tubes has been developed an the L.M.S. and some other railways by introducing sand guns for this purpose.

Sir William Stanier, F.R.S. (P.P.) said that the building of lightweight stock had been very much in his mind for a number of years. On the L.M.S. in 1938. the Liverpool and Southport stock had had to be renewed, and he remembered the late Mr. Fairburn saying that for every ton that could be saved in the weight of the stock, he could save £10 a year in current. That had be an incentive to get some lightweight stock.
In the Derby drawing office there had been a very able young designer, Mr. Moon, who unfortunately died during the war. Mr Moon had developed a design (taking advantage of the Vienendeel truss') for some lightweight stock which had given some very interesting figures. The motor coach seated 88 and weighed 40 ton 5 cwt. The trailer coach seated 102 and weighed 25 ton 2 cwt. Sir William had been able to give particulars of that construction and the means used to develop it in a paper which he had prepared for presentation to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and the Institution of Mechanical Engineers' Joint Meeting in September 1939; he had gone over to America to give the paper, but unfortunately the conference had been cancelled and he had come back by the next boat. However, the paper had been pnnted and was in existence.
The intention had been that this principle should be developed for main line stock, but unfortunately the war had come, and this hampered development.
Sir William emphasised the importance of remembering that weight was a very important asset or liability when considering costs. The more lightweight stock was developed, the better the services that could be given. Lightweight stock would reduce wear and tear and It would reduce the power required; and, provided it was possible to look after the corrosion, to which Mr. Cock had referred, it would produce very much better stock than existed at present.

Riddles comments taken from H.C.B. Rogers: The last steam locomotive engineer (biography of Riddles):
He trusted everybody and his one fault, it is could be called a fault, was a lack of political acumen, and he could never imagine any intrigue against him. But we would talk of such matters and I think that I helped him to a certain extent. I suppose, having experienced first the Lancashire and Yorkshire taking over the London and North Western, and then the Midland taking over the lot, and the intrigue which resulted, I had developed a suspicious mind. I remember him returning from a meeting and saying, "They won't have it, Robert". The matter concerned was fundamental to his position, and I felt that ifhe gave way he would be surrendering a right inherent to the CME. I talked to the great man, explaining what I meant, whilst he listened staring down at his desk without saying anything. In due course we went home- I not knowing whether he agreed with me or not. In the morning he called me in and said, "It's all right, Robert, they've now agreed". This incident is worth mentioning as an indication of his great character. He never praised anybody for anything; good results he expected. On the other hand he could be cutting in his criticism. But he appreciated his staff, and as I got to know him better I realized that it was not what he said, but the tone of his voice which gave the clue to his feelings. I came to know him so well that I could tell from his face whether it was wise to say anything or nothing, and no man could have had a kinder or more understanding chief. Of course, as in the case of any person holding high position, there were those who did not entirely agree with his views, but he was regarded with appreciation and affection by all who came in contact with him, not only in Great Britain, but in India, America, and Canada. On one occasion in Canada he was addressing the Standards Committee and he told them that he had first heard of Standards when, as a young man, he received complaints from the Operations Department (Passengers) about the size of the hole in the lavatory seats. Stanier went off to the Joiners' Shop to investigate and was met by the foreman who said, "They are absolutely standard size, Sir," and, removing his bowler hat, he fitted it upside down into the hole!
'I became very close to the Stanier family and frequently visited Newburn, Rickmansworth (their home which was named after Churchward's house at Swindon) and they, too, were often at my home in Watford. In addition we met often on holidays in Scotland and Cornwall. Stanier was a great lover of Rudyard Kipling, and when he was not reading technical articles Rudyard Kipling came to his rescue. He was always reading and seldom, if ever, went out to such entertainments as the theatre or cinema. Indeed his "entertainments" were almost confined to meetings of the "Mechanicals", to which he was devoted, and he would delight in discussing technical problems at any time.
'In his latter days I visited him as much as I could, and invariably telephoned him when I went to London. I happened to telephone early on the morning he died (September 27, 1965), and his daughter told me that they had just found him. I took the first train and saw myoId chief for the last time, lying peacefully at rest. I felt that it was a great prfvilege to be there at that time to do what I could to ease the burdens on his family.

Biography

For obvious reasons this is based on Chacksfield and certainly not on Westwood which contains several errors. Willliam Arthur Stanier was born in Swindon on 27 May 1876. His father worked for the Great Western Railway as William Dean's Chief Clerk and had moved with him to Swindon from Wolverhampton. K.J. Cook called his father a "very astute and energetic businesss man" who was Stores Superintendent. The subject was the eldest child and was educated at Swindon High School and Wycliffe College, near Stroud for one year. His brothers enjoyed longer periods at this private school. He started work as an office boy on the Great Western Railway, and at the age of 16 he became an apprentice, starting in the carriage works and moving to the locomotive works in 1892. He was an excellent sportsman.

On 1 November 1897 he entered the Drawing Office. On 1 July 1901 he beame an Associate Member of the Mechanicals, and in September of the same year he became Mechanical Inspector at Swindon locomotive depot, rising to Assistant Divisional Locomotive Superintent at Swindon and then at Westbourne Park where he became involved in mutual improvemnt classes for the enginemen. At this time he was courting Ella Elizabeth (Nelle) Morse. In April 1906 he became an Assistant to the Works Manager in Swindon. In 1908 he became a full Member of the Mechanicals and was appointed Divisional Superintendent at Swindon locomotive depot. Peck refers to Stanier being sent to America and on return introduced the outside steam pipe to Churchward's designs through the drawings of Bill Pellow. In 1912 he became (Senior) Assistant Locomotive Works Manager under Collett and became Works Manager in 1920. Chacksfield suggests that Stanier was responsible for Churchward's switch to outside steam pipes, introduced on the 47xx class. When Churchward retired and Collett became the Chief Mechanical Engineer Stanier was promoted in parrallel as his deputy.

Cook notes that Stanier travelled with King George V to the Fair of the Iron Horse at the invitation of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad in 1927. Stanier described this visit to the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.

At this stage it is worth noting that although Stanier lacked some of the wider experience which had been gained by some of his contemporaries, notably Gresley (who had been apprenticed on the LNWR under Webb, prior to moving to the L&YR and GNR), Stanier had a very broad experience of Great Western locomotives in operation, and under construction.

Following meetings with Sir Harold Hartley, one of the LMS Vice-Presidents, in 1931 (including lunch at the Athenaeum, home to bishops and scientists), in 1932 he became chief mechanical engineer of Britain's largest railway, the London, Midland & Scottish Railway. H.A.V. Bulleid's Master builders of steam (p. 143) shows that Stanier had problems with the extremely able Chief Draughtsman, Herbert Chambers, who was "an excellent and experienced designer, noted for his heroic and successful effort in coordinating (against time) the design work between Derby Loco Drawing Office and the North British Locomotive Co. on the Royal Scot, but a dyed-in-the-wool Midland man. He argued with Stanier about all those innovations which he could not readily accept. At one point during these difficult weeks, rather lonely among Midland doubts, Stanier tried to get S.O. Ell from the G.W.R. to come as an Assistant on experimental work; but Collett refused to release him. A good Chief and a good Assistant both know that a nice balance between querying orders and blindly following them is essential, but Stanier and Chambers were unable to find this balance with Chambers as Chief Draughtsman. Stanier, therefore, switched him to be Technical Assistant at Euston and appointed Tom Coleman to be Chief Draughtsman in charge of both Derby and Crewe Loco Drawing Offices, resident at Derby. Coleman came from Horwich; where the air was distinctly less parochial, and had previously worked with H. G. Ivatt at Stoke. He was a hard worker and shared Stanier's dislike of frills. Stanier got along excellently with him, considered him eminently sound and practical rather than theoretical, ready to incorporate all the new ideas, and not too ready to query points differing from previous practice. Chambers may incidentally have done quite a bit of softening-up: Derby had some first-class design techniques and these did not always require modification by what was sometimes rudely referred to as "Wiltshire wisdom." Coleman also had a decided artistic bent which Stanier admired and which contributed to the apparently effortlessly balanced appearance of the many Stanier locomotive types.

His new designs notably the Jubilee class were not problem-free as Swindon ideas did not combine well with the LMS three-cylinder layout as developed for the Royal Scot class, and Stanier's Pacifics retained the Great Western's four-cylinder layout. Stanier's other three-cylinder design, the 2-6-4Ts for the LTSR section followed Gresley practice but with three sets of valve gear. Chacksfield states that this was to provide rapid acceleration, but may have been to limit hammer blow on the stretch of line into Fenchurch Street owned by the LNER. Rutherford is highly illuminating on the Jubilee debacle.

Chacksfield suggests that the class 5 may have owed something to the LSWR H15 as the design for the class 5 partially involved the Vulcan Foundry where the Chief Draughsman, Finlayson, was the brother of Findlayson of the LSWR/SR. at Eastleigh. which ranged from the streamlined Coronation 4-6-2 through his very numerous mixed . traffic two-cylinder 4-6-0 to his equally successful 8F freight 2-8-0, were characterized by such Great Western features as taper boilers, long travel valves, improved Churchward axleboxes, and de Glehn bogies. When he retired in 1944 it was clear that he was the most successful and influential British locomotive engineer of his time. In 1938 he went to India with the special committee examining the derailment-prone standard Pacifics of the Indian railways and, perhaps primed by his own research into the riding qualities of 4-6-2 machines, was able to diagnose excessive freedom of lateral movement in the leading bogie and trailing truck. Later Stanier returned to India on a Machine Tool Mission and took Jarvis with him Chacksfield's biography of Jarvis describes this visit in detail. Towards the end of his career he was knighted, became a Fellow of the Royal Society (a great honour for an engineer), and was president of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Jarvis considered Stanier a hard, but fair taskmaster and on page 72 of Chacksfield's book he noted that Stanier had "big driving wheels" and walked very quickly.

Nock (pages 201-2 British locomotives of the 20th century. Vol. 1) records a conversation which is said to have taken place between Edward Thompson and Stanier in which Thompson is claimed to have stated that he intended to rebuild the Gresley Pacifics with Stephenson link motion for the inside cylinders which horrified Stanier who responded that the LMS had to scrap the Caledonian Railway 4-6-0s which had been constructed with this strange arangement.

On page 84 of his book Larkin noted that W.A. Stanier was a very likeable and much respected engineer. He will probably be best remembered for his renowned Pacifics. In 1939 Larkin was involved in production planning for new construction.

Rutherford (BackTrack, 18 172), possibly incorrectly implies that Stanier had less interest in non-steam traction and quotes the following via Chacksfield: There is a good anecdote about Stanier and steam. On a visit to the Pennsylvania Railroad in the USA in 1936, he was out on the line with a team measuring track stresses due to flange contact at speed (the LMS had plans to speed up certain express schedules). A number of electric trains went by, then a train appeared hauled by a K4 Pacific and everyone stood back in admiration as it went past. Stanier then remarked, "There you are, nobody cares a damn for your tin boxes!"

Cox (Locomotive panorama volume 2) who was a member of the Pacific Locomotive Committee observed that "Stanier with his urbane manner and human tolerance exerted his influence towards peace and he was greatly respected by all sides.

See: O. S. Nock, William Stanier (1964)
Nock, O.S. revised Ralph Harrington biography in Dictionary of National Biography
Journal of the Institution of Locomotive Engineers, No.147
J. Bellwood, D. Jenkinson, Gresley and Stanier (1976).

Portraits, etc

Essery, R.J. and Harris, N. LMS reflections: a collection of photographs from the Hulton Picture Company. 1986.
Contains several interesting pictures: page 41 Stanier "showing" Sir Josiah Stamp the turbine locomotive at Euston Station on 27 June 1935. Page 32: Stanier congratulating Driver T.J. Clarke and Fireman J. Lewis at Euston on return from press run to Crewe and back with Coronation Scot train (29 June 1937).
Atkins, Philip Dear Mr Stanier, you don't know me but...Steam Wld. 1999.(144), 21-4.
In 1965 the author wrote from his home address to several of the retired CMEs to ask them fairly specific questions about their design policy: Atkins was successful and some of his replies are reproduced as received, including that from Sir William. Illus. includes a late informal portrait
Bonavia, Michael R. The birth of British Rail. p. 56
Group photograph at opening of Rugby Locomotive Testing Station on 19 October 1948 with Peppercorn, O.V.S. Bulleid, Louis Armand, F.W. Hawksworth, Edward Thompson, Parmentier, and H.G. Ivatt
Head. Ken. Memories of Uncle Will. Steam Wld, 2005 (217) 62-4.
Anecdotes: Dr Margaret Stanier relates how Sir William made a very small spanner for her watch before she set out for Africa and how he responded to his brother, Charles's sons playing with their live steam train set. Jean Velecky, another neice realtes how she was entertained by her Uncle on his special train when he was inspecting German railway workshops in 1946. She also had the dubious pleasure of driving Sir William's Cortina in the presence of the great man.
Marsh, Phil. Stanier did not like stramlined locos! Rly Mag., 2006, 152 (1258) 27-9.
Meeting with Jean Velecky, Stanier's niece on the Mid-Hants Railway. Marsh implies that Velecky had been a fellow student of Harold Hartley: this is clearly impossible as Jean did not graduate until 1950. Claims that Stanier's favourite locomotive was the class 5 4-6-0. He also disliked streamlining. Illustrations include Jean Veleck, Jean Stanier and Sir William at home in Rickmansworth in 1963 (colour) and William aged 12 in 1888 in group family photograph. Jean Velecky is also shown at Ropley on the Mid-Hants Railway.

Updated 2008-04-23