Talk:South African Class C 4-6-0T

NGR Class G numbering

The contents of an email from John Middleton on the NGR numbering puzzle:

From: John Nicholas Middleton
To: Aidan McCarthy
Cc: Andre H Kritzinger ; The Paxtons
Sent: 03 October 2013 07:36 PM
Subject: Re: Natal Harbour Board and NGR tanks

Aidan / Andre

Thanks, I hadn't spotted the subtle differences on the photos of Nos 4 and 6 before, not sure if the balloon stack on No 4 necessarily implies wood firing, there is no rack for the wood (unless this was carried on a tender of some sort). I'll say up front - this was hard work !

The NGR loco numbering in the 1-48 range is proving to be the most complex of any railway pre-SAR, beating even the CGR. The NGR seem to have renumbered at random but I suspect it was a religious "gap filling" process (The Highland Railway where Hendrie originated also practised "gap filling"). The published versions (especially that in Holland) appear to be a snapshot at a point in time but do not show the complete picture. No one seems to know where Holland got his data but as it was likely from SAR archives I suspect his version is likely dated about 1909-1910. Ron Conyngham's booklet on the K&S Class similarly shows a list (different) which I feel is also a snapshot.

Sources vary but this is what I have
K 2097 1876 2-6-0T Wythes & Jackson, Natal (contr.), DURBAN No. 1
K 2098 1877 2-6-0T Wythes & Jackson, Natal (contr.), MARITZBERG No. 2
? Wythes & Jackson, Natal (contr), ULUNDI No. 3 (possibly Standard Gauge No. 3 rebuilt)
BP 1702-08 1877 2-6-0T NGR, 1-7
K 2254-58 1879 2-6-0T (reb to 4-6-0T) NGR, 8-12
K 2269-70 1879 2-6-0T (reb to 4-6-0T) NGR, 13-14
HE 249 1880 0-6-0ST NGR, 15
K 2358-60 1880 4-6-0T NGR, 16-18 (Carter's Kitson list has these as 17-19 which may have been a later renumbering)

Up to this point its fairly straightforward (I think Carter is wrong)

See attached 1880 report, which suggests 21 engines after the three were taken over from the contractors, this suggests that the contractors locos became NGR 19-21, at least initially.

Then we have
K 2504-08 1882 4-6-0T NGR, 20-24 (Carter's Kitson list has these as 22-26 which may have been a later renumbering)

It seems something funny happened around Nos 16-21, possibly the contractors locos initially fitted here but Holland gives the two Contractors Kitsons as 27-28, so perhaps they were renumbered from within the 19-21 block.

Then just a mess
RS 2484-90 1882 4-6-0T We have no evidence for original numbering of the 19 RS locos - the 1904 NGR list only gives 17 RS locos - Nos 16, 29-41 and 45-47 plus rebuild 21
RS 2519-20 1883 4-6-0T Known numbers do not indicate chronological numbering
RS 2571-80 1884 4-6-0T
K 2898-900 1885 4-6-0T NGR, 42-44
Hairy Mary 2-8-2 NGR, 48

Of the 4-6-0T as built there were 19 RS and 18 K - total 37
Dec 1904 shows - Kitsons as NGR 508-509, 11-14, 17-20, 22-24, 26, 42-44 plus rebuilt 25 with RS as 16, 29-41, 45-47 plus rebuilt 21 - total 36 locos, so one RS already withdrawn by Dec 1904
Dec 1908 shows two groups - Kitsons missing 23 (withdrawn) with 508 shown (probably erroneously as a 2-6-0T). the RS unchanged
At SAR renumbering, survivors were 38, 40-45, 47, 48, 501-04/06/07-514, although most of these were already renumberings, in fact of these 45 is the only one that seems to have kept its original number right up until the SAR renumbering.

Note that neither 27 or 28 appear in the 1904 or 1908 lists which supports the theory that they were two of the contractors locos.

However, in 1901, NGR started with a new numbering series at 1 which ran to 33 before the SAR takeover, surviving older locos in the original series 1-48 were then consolidated into the range 38-48 with some in the 5XX series which may have been reserved for workshop / construction / departmental locos. This resulted in the numbers 38-48 being used twice, except possibly 45.

The 5xx numbers were also re-used
501 (1st) original 1 (assumed) - withdrawn before 1905
501 (2nd) ex 512 after 1908 to SAR 0501 - but not in renumbering lists, scrapped March 1916 (from Rolling Stock Register)
502 (1st) original 2 (assumed) - withdrawn before 1905
502 (2nd) ex 513 after 1908 to SAR 0502 - but not in renumbering lists, scrapped March 1928 (from Rolling Stock Register)
503 (1st) original 3 (assumed) - withdrawn before 1905
503 (2nd) ex 514 after 1908 to SAR 0503 - but not in renumbering lists, sold S. Rayman (for scrap ?) June 1930 (from Rolling Stock Register)
504 original 4 later SAR 0504 - scrapped March 1918
505 original 5 but sold to industry in 1894 (ERPM)
506 (1st) original 6 (assumed) - withdrawn before 1905
506 (2nd) possibly original 17 or 18 (sources vary) to SAR 67
507 original 7 later SAR 0507 - scrapped March 1916
508 (1st) likely original 8 after 1901 but 1904 list shows as a 2-6-0T, probably withdrawn after 1908
508 (2nd) ex 20 (possibly original 10) to SAR 63
509 (1st) likely original 9 after 1901, probably withdrawn after 1908
509 (2nd) possibly original 17 or 22 (sources vary) to SAR 71
510 (1st) Neilsen 0-4-0ST (old number not known) withdrawn between 1905-09
510 (2nd) after 1909, possibly original 42 , to SAR 75
511 Neilsen 0-4-0ST (possibly original 91) to SAR 0511
512 (1st) Zululand 1 to 501 after 1909 - see above,
512 (2nd) after 1909, possibly original 44, to SAR 76
513 (1st) Zululand 2 to 502 after 1909 - see above
513 (2nd) after 1909, possibly original 11, to SAR 64
514 (1st) Zululand 3 to 503 after 1909 - see above
514 (2nd) after 1909 possibly original 12, to SAR 65

The answers probably lie in the Natal Archives !!!!.

Regards

John

Posted for future reference. André Kritzinger (talk) 18:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

NGR appointment dates - W. Milne & G.W. Reid

Correspondence from Bruno Martin on 27 October 2013:

From: Bruno Martin
To: Andre H Kritzinger
Sent: 27 October 2013 02:58 AM
Subject: Re: SA Class C2 4-4-2T

Hi Andre

Regarding SA Class C2 4-4-2T “In 1896 William Milne ....” - William Milne had a falling out with the Natal Colonial Government which brought about his premature retirement in June 1893. He was replaced by George William Reid as from 1 July 1893.

I know Frank Holland has 1896 on page 88 of vol.1, maybe Milne, while in office, proposed the modification and when Reid took over it was finally carried out in 1896, who knows. I noticed Holland states on page 91 that Reid took over from Milne in 1896, which is not correct, the Natal Blue Book has the date of appointment for Reid as of 1 July, 1893.

Kind regards

Bruno

Posted here for reference. André Kritzinger (talk) 11:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)