Bibek Debroy: Locomotives of history

I wonder what happened to Lady Curzon. I do not mean Mary Victoria Curzon, wife of the viceroy.  In addition to a rose, she also had a steam locomotive named after her. The first indigenous locomotive was built in 1895 by Ajmer Workshop (now part of North Western Railway). This was the metre gauge F1-734, “F” signifying mixed traffic.  Before that, locomotives were assembled in India, not quite made.  F1-734 retired in the 1950s and you will find it housed at the National Rail Museum, cow-catcher and all. Jamalpur Locomotive Workshop, set up by East India Railway in 1862, followed in 1899 with “Lady Curzon”, numbered CA-764.  In those days, that locomotive cost Rs 33,000 to make. Lady Curzon retired in 1932 and I have been unable to find out what happened to her. “Her” is right. Jamalpur has an intimate connection with Indian railway history, in several ways. Rudyard Kipling visited Jamalpur in 1888 and wrote three pieces (not very charitable) on his visit in The Pioneer.  Subsequently, these were published as “Among the Railway Folk”. Those descriptions also covered the workshop. “Walk into a huge, brick-built, tin-roofed stable, capable of holding twenty-four locomotives under treatment, and see what must be done to the Iron Horse, once every three years if he is to do his work well. On reflection, Iron Horse is wrong. An engine is a she — as distinctly feminine as a ship or a mine.”

Not everyone read Kipling, or followed his injunction.  Most engines were named after males. This includes engines that figure in a question that’s staple quiz fare. Which was the first train to run in India? It’s not quite the April 1853 run from Boribunder to Thana/Thane, the staple quiz answer. That’s certainly the first commercial passenger ride. But there were non-commercial and non-passenger trains/locomotives earlier. That 1853 train was pulled by three engines — Sahib, Sindh and Sultan. No photograph exists of that train. If someone shows you a purported picture, a fast one is being pulled. Like Lady Curzon, no one seems to know what happened to Sahib and Sultan. They just vanished. Sindh was luckier. He was last seen on a plinth at the Byculla office of what used to be Great Indian Peninsular Railway. But Indian Railways (IR) decided to celebrate 100 years in 1953. Sindh was brought to Delhi and vanished thereafter. Between 1865 and 1941, India produced 700 locomotives. Between 1853 and 1947, 14,400 locomotives were imported from Britain and 3,000 from other countries. That’s what economic historians tell us. This import promotion was probably a combination of low tariffs on imports of railway material, the way standards (also for locomotives) were determined, routing of railway contracts through India Office (in London) and the fact that most railway supervisors and engineers were European.

Though details are awaited, we know the World Bank will now partner with IR to set up a Railway Development Fund. In 1949, India borrowed from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank. The report, on appraisal of India’s loan application, makes for interesting reading. “Since India does not at present manufacture locomotives and tank wagons, to correct the shortage of motive power, the Indian Railways began placing orders late in 1947 for 863 locomotives, spare boilers, and spare parts from the USA, Canada, the United Kingdom, and France… The goal is to reduce the locomotive fleet from the present figure of more than 7,000 engines to 6,000 engines within the next 10 years. Accordingly, lines which receive new engines are required to scrap old engines in return, at a ratio varying from 12 to 17 new engines for every 10 new engines delivered.” On India’s behalf, this loan agreement was signed (on August 18, 1949) by Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, then Indian ambassador to the USA. In case you are wondering about the term “tank wagon”, those are the ones used to carry liquids and gaseous stuff. I felt a sense of déjà vu when I read about the World Bank anchoring the Railway Development Fund.

Compared to 7,000 engines then, we have 10,500 engines now — not much of an addition, considering the number of years that have passed. In 1960-61, we had 10,624 — even less of an addition in more than five decades. Sure, there are many kinds of locomotives and an aggregate number can be misleading. Nevertheless, it is an indication. Every year, we junk about 100 locomotives. We should probably junk twice as many. Every year, we produce around 600 locomotives.  That is a net figure of 500.  We probably need a net figure of at least 1,000. Over the next 20 years or so, we probably need to increase the stock of locomotives to 30,000. We will import some, as is being done for the Dedicated Freight Corridor. We will have additional domestic capacity, including private ones, like in Madhepura and Marhowra, both in Bihar. But don’t get the wrong idea. Even now, India also exports a few locomotives, to some Asian and African countries, though these can occasionally be metre gauge. Modern locomotives don’t have fancy names like “Lady Curzon”.  Those early ones seem to possess more individual character.

The writer is a member of the National Institution for Transforming India Aayog. The views are personal