Jump to content

820 (4.6.2T) class proposed GSR loco

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Both recently, and in the distant past, there were posts on here about the proposed-but-never-built GSR 820 class, of which five were apparently planned, initially at any rate for the DSER section. They were based on a tank version of the 800 class, albeit with many modifications, and designed obviously in Inchicore about 1940.

I have an outline drawing, currently on loan to a relative, but thanks to GSR800 and Mayner, I have been able to retrieve a copy of it along with an article from an old publication.

(Ken - I think you were asking about it?)

I had long forgotten even lending the drawing to be published before, otherwise I would have mentioned where it appeared.

So here it is, along with the spiel.

For an attempted model of it - which would look VERY nice - while it's tempting to think of it in the lined green that the GSR used on the trio of 800s, my old notes suggest that it was planned to plain old grey.


The notes written about it are indeed interesting in themselves......

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Galteemore said:

Very interesting. There’s a vague WT-ishness about it in places.

Yes, there is.

What I DO know is that both Edgar Bredin and my grandfather (who did this drawing) had been to Derby, and people from there had been to Inchicore. 

While this is supposition, Inchicore was also in constant discussion with Dundalk in the 1930s (and probably other times), and that the GNR at one stage wondered whether it was possible to make a large six-coupled tank engine. I wonder was there a connection amongst all of these matters?

It stands to reason that those in the loco works of all the major companies both here and on the Isle of Brexit would all have compared notes from time to time. On smaller scales, the communication between both the CDR, SLNCR and even Isle of Man Railway with Dundalk Works are well known. The IOMR and the GNR had Beyer, Peacock & Co. in common, after all!

While I have no details whatsoever, another distant relative of mine went to England as a railway engineer of some sort in the 1910s, and ended up advising the Argentinian lines somewhere, and eventually went there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its possible that the 4-6-2T was a development of a 1925 GSR proposal an outside cylinder 4-4-2T for use on the DSER which eventually emerged as the solitary 2-6-2T 850. The 820 class looks strikingly similar to to original 380 Class proposal with an extended bunker and an additional set of driving wheels, it was proposed to fit the new locos with the O Class boiler which was fitted to the 1936 built 342 (D4) Class 4-4-0s and several similar ex-GSWR 4-4-0 Classes which would have achieved a large measure of standardisation.


Its possible the GSR adapted the 3 cylinder drive and  4-6-2T wheel arrangement to produce a smooth rising locomotive with wide route availability. 3 cylinder locomotives were supposed to be easier on the track than 2 cylinder locos with outside cylinders and uncertainty over the stability of a loco with a leading truck at speed. The Woolwich Moguls were notoriously rough riding, 2-6-2T  850 appears to have had a reputation of rolling at speed while both the SR and LNER experienced derailments with locos with leading trucks at speed including the LNER V2 mixed traffic 2-6-2 & SR river Class 2-6-4T. The LNER appear to have resolved the problems with the V2s while the River Class were withdrawn and converted to 2-6-0 tender locos.

Its unlikely that GSR/CIE had the resources or could afford to maintain its p.w. to the same standard as the LMS and GWR that extensively used 2-6-2T & 2-6-4T locos on fast passenger services.

Interestingly Inchacore developed a proposal in 1945 to "convert" Woolwich Moguls into 3 Cylinder 4-6-0 mixed traffic locos visually a smaller version of the 800 Class.

The conversions would have practically have been new locos apart from retaining Woolwich tenders and driving wheels a large boilered 3 cylinder development of the GSWR 500 Class 4-6-0s of 1925 one of the first successful mixed traffic 4-6-0 classes in the British Isles.



  • Like 2
  • Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both tank designs have grown on me, though i find the pacific tank extremely bizarre, the gigantic coal bunker and the last set of drivers behind the cab, you can certainly see the origins from the older design. The big one weighs 80 tons....can't see them going on many branches, axle load on the drivers is more than on the woolwich 4-6-0 rebuild.

However the 4-4-2 tank catches my eye, similar to 850 but 4-4-0 inspired rather than from the moguls. Standardisation of parts would no doubt have been something greatly desired by the GSR. It was essentially an alternative design proposed as far as i can tell

An interesting resource for all https://www.steamindex.com/locotype/gsr.htm

Of interest is an apparent 1937 design of an Inchicore Pacific type. Now, note I can find nothing else on this design, or that it got anywhere past talk other than the following statement! 

..'1937 diagram for a proposed Inchicore 'Pacific' which would have much as the 4-6-0 later built but with a carrying axle tucked close behind Argentine-fashion, with a rather unpleasant streamlined cowl round the single chimney. Presumably, a Pacific was even more prestigeous, but adequate turntables were impossible to justify!'

I presume that if this is of any legitimacy, which is itself debatable, it was likely a preliminary to the 800s, likely dismissed as being over the top when there were serious debates over the need of 10 4-6-0s, nevermind a Pacific.




  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use