Bulleid's Leader: could it have even been successful?

[Edwin_m]

Doesn't the Vancouver metro (SkyTrain?) use linear induction motors?

Yes. 

 

It's less affected by gradients in the sense that traction doesn't rely on wheel-rail adhesion, and the trackside equipment is simply a large metal plate between the tracks.  It doesn't need magnetic coils all the way along the guideway as some systems do.  However I don't know about braking - it may be challenging to make a failsafe brake that relies on linear induction, and I'm unsure if regeneration is possible either. 

 

As far as I know this technology hasn't spread beyond Vancouver and a couple of precursors, so probably another example of a solution in need of a problem. 

[Nearholmer]

The discussion of LIM systems started with the assumption that a traction motor is heavy and noisy, neither of which is true. A modern AC motor is incredibly "power dense", quiet, and low-maintenance, and power electronics permit very good control. It's good on a train for the same reasons that it is now becoming popular in cars.

[runs as required]

Haven't you overlooked this LIM line ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Maglev_Train

 

I was involved with facilitating a futuristic state-of-the-art student group research  project maybe 20years ago where lift engineers researchers were presenting their visions of LIM lifts transferring from distant car parks to seriously high rise inhabited structures.

 

But the anxiety was about health issues from several times daily usage within the magnetic field. I understood it was like living under a high power transmission line.

 

dh

[PenrithBeacon]

The very high pressure water tube boiler was part of my idea all those years ago. This would reduce both size and weight of the boiler and condenser, but they would still be larger and heavier than a diesel engine. And you have problems with a water tube boiler mounted on rails, as Sir Nigel found out. Whether or not modern technology could overcome these is speculative.

 

...

 

Marine engineers found during WW1 that the then design concepts of water tube boilers didn't work because of shock and vibration. They were also finding that the locomotive fire tube boiler had similar but worse issues, particularly in small vessels like destroyers. Basically what they were doing was redesigning the locomotive longitudinal fire tube boiler so that it became a water tube boiler, but the weight of the water broke the tubes. This is the concept the NHG adopted and he should have known it wouldn't work, but being his usual blinkered self he carried on .

In the mid-1930s Babcock and Wilcocks looked at the vertical boiler concept that Sentinel (amongst others) were using and decided to go again. Their idea was to use a number of vertical water tube boilers mounted side by side and fed from a common firebox, oil fired. This idea was adopted by the Royal Navy and it proved to be very successful being used on many classes of warships. 

I think the Leaders suffered from not being radical enough. Bulleid just pushed the conventional Stephenson locomotive beyond, way beyond, its possibilities. If he had gone the Garrett route with an oil fired modular vertical boiler and a cab at each end an 0-6-0+0-6-0 might have worked. The driver and fireman could have sat together in whatever cab they happened to occupy, so eliminating the horrendous working conditions for the fireman. Whether they would have got the import licenses for the oil is another matter though.

Regards

[billbedford]

Yarrow designed the W1 boiler basing it on the same 3 drum water tube design used by the navy since, at least, HMS Dreadnought.

Edited July 12, 2017 by billbedford

[jjb1970]

Water tube boilers are pretty much standard for marine and power generation boilers except for very small auxiliary units, and have been for decades. Provided you keep on top of feedwater quality and dosing, and keep within the limits for start up thermal gradients they're very reliable and last decades with pretty limited maintenance. Even low pressure auxiliary boilers tend to be water tube, the heat transfer is much more efficient and you get high evaporation rates from very compact boilers.

As LMS2968 has pointed out, the problem is - why would you carry a large boiler around, a supply of feed water and a condenser etc in addition to fuel and the turbine and transmission when you can just fit a gas turbine if you wanted turbo-machinery and get lighter weight, a more compact engine and better efficiency? Or a diesel. Even coal fired power stations aren't particularly efficient but it's a lot more efficient to use steam plant to generate electricity in a power plant and transmit it to the train than to do on-board the train.  

[runs as required]

...transmit it to the train than to do on-board the train.  

The ultimate would be transmission of AC or DC power without wires.

How are Nissan proposing to recharge the batteries of future 'Leaf' type cars from a cable under the road apparently through an air gap?

dh

[PatB]

The ultimate would be transmission of AC or DC power without wires.

How are Nissan proposing to recharge the batteries of future 'Leaf' type cars from a cable under the road apparently through an air gap?

dh

Well my electric toothbrush recharges without any metal-to-metal contact. I assume that a primary transformer coil and core is housed in the charging base and the secondary coil is in the brush body. I can't see it working on a moveable vehicle though .

[rockershovel]

Well my electric toothbrush recharges without any metal-to-metal contact. I assume that a primary transformer coil and core is housed in the charging base and the secondary coil is in the brush body. I can't see it working on a moveable vehicle though .

Well, my electric toothbrush works when I'm at sea...

[Reorte]

The ultimate would be transmission of AC or DC power without wires.

How are Nissan proposing to recharge the batteries of future 'Leaf' type cars from a cable under the road apparently through an air gap?

dh

Induction charging I believe. Don't ask me how well it works or how efficient it is, although they must think it's viable. Wonder if it might be a future option for battery trains on fairly self-contained branches that are hard to justify the cost of electrification infrastructure, with the charging equipment sitting under the track at the terminus?

[jjb1970]

Neither capacitive nor inductive coupling is new. On wireless electrical energy transmission, Nikolai Tesla was working on that over a century ago and there are recognised far field techniques. I know a Greek ship owners who is obsessed with the idea of getting rid of electrical wiring from his ships and always raises it whenever we chat.

Edited July 13, 2017 by jjb1970

[Mr Jorrox]

' ... the Trades Unions would have been brought into 'Leader' manning matters ... '

 

The unions were threatening to 'black' the Leader when it was withdrawn.

[bike2steam]

 

' ... the Trades Unions would have been brought into 'Leader' manning matters ... '

 

The unions were threatening to 'black' the Leader when it was withdrawn.

 

 

Given the conditions the fireman had to work in - rightly so.

[adb968008]

I totally agree. So much rubbish is written about how Steam could have gone on and been developed. NOT in Britain it couldn't. The mystery is why after the 1956 clean air act BR didn't put a halt to all new build steam locos, presumably just too socially difficult with no alternative supply of new motive power available. In 1956 it was calculated BR produced 10% of all the air pollution in Britain. So many correspondents don't seem to have lived through a smog. Now I'm too young to remember the great smog of c1952 which meant the act was introduced but even in 1961 we had to walk the 5 miles home from school because all public transport stopped and you couldn't see a light shining on the top of a light pole. And that wasn't in some great industrial monopolis but suburban Sunbury to Staines.

 

Paul

This is exactly what I experienced a few years ago in Hong Kong.

Many times ive travelled here, and stayed in Macau, on one recent visit i enjoyed a luxury hotel in summer with a great outdoor swimming pool... but i couldnt see the sun for smog, not a cloud in the sky when i flew in, just a thick layer of dust nearer to ground level.

Edited October 10, 2018 by adb968008

[TheSignalEngineer]

I totally agree. So much rubbish is written about how Steam could have gone on and been developed. NOT in Britain it couldn't. The mystery is why after the 1956 clean air act BR didn't put a halt to all new build steam locos, presumably just too socially difficult with no alternative supply of new motive power available. In 1956 it was calculated BR produced 10% of all the air pollution in Britain. So many correspondents don't seem to have lived through a smog. Now I'm too young to remember the great smog of c1952 which meant the act was introduced but even in 1961 we had to walk the 5 miles home from school because all public transport stopped and you couldn't see a light shining on the top of a light pole. And that wasn't in some great industrial monopolis but suburban Sunbury to Staines.

 

No the Steam loco was doomed in our little overcrowded island when Bulleid was attempting to improve it.

 

Paul

The 1952 smog was one of my earliest memories, and I too walked home from school when public transport used to stop for fog in the early 1960s. One night I did that I remember it was so bad that my Dad who was in the Fire Brigade had to walk back from a fire carrying a paraffin flare in front of the fire engine so they could find the way back to the fire station. They pulled into the yard and he went round the back to close the gate only to find several cars lined up behind. They had followed along and had no idea where they were.

[rockershovel]

This is exactly what I experienced a few years ago in Hong Kong.

Many times ive travelled here, and stayed in Macau, on one recent visit i enjoyed a luxury hotel in summer with a great outdoor swimming pool... but i couldnt see the sun for smog, not a cloud in the sky when i flew in, just a thick layer of dust nearer to ground level.

I had a similar experience in Tehran about ten years ago. Tehran is described as an “Alpine” location, but all you see is haze from the traffic and general pollution. One morning I was about early, probably on the way to the airport, and behold! Mountains, in a ring around the city...

[hmrspaul]

I had a similar experience in Tehran about ten years ago. Tehran is described as an “Alpine” location, but all you see is haze from the traffic and general pollution. One morning I was about early, probably on the way to the airport, and behold! Mountains, in a ring around the city...

Interesting. When we visited Tehran in 1975 the traffic was horrendous. However the mountains were beautiful. I have a lovely photo of my Julie and her brother on the roof terrace of a flat in the suburbs with a glorious view behind, snow on the tops of the Elburz Mountains. It was May.

 

Iran remains on our repeat bucket list. an outstanding country with lovely people. and even in 1975 good trains - with lots of steam engines rotting in the yards at Dezful and Ahwaz.

 

Paul

[Coryton]

Iran remains on our repeat bucket list. an outstanding country with lovely people. and even in 1975 good trains - with lots of steam engines rotting in the yards at Dezful and Ahwaz.

 

 

Ah well that was before we inflicted the class 141s on them...

 

Going a bit back to the topic, I've seen conflicting views on whether steam locomotives were a significant contribution to air pollution or not.

[rockershovel]

Interesting. When we visited Tehran in 1975 the traffic was horrendous. However the mountains were beautiful. I have a lovely photo of my Julie and her brother on the roof terrace of a flat in the suburbs with a glorious view behind, snow on the tops of the Elburz Mountains. It was May.

 

Iran remains on our repeat bucket list. an outstanding country with lovely people. and even in 1975 good trains - with lots of steam engines rotting in the yards at Dezful and Ahwaz.

 

Paul

I knew Tehran in the last days of the Shah, and returned in 2004/5 to find it..... changed.

[Rudititanic]

Very interesting reading on this thread and plainly the benefits (intended and realised) vs limitations (most certainly realised!) of Leader have been very thoroughly considered.  From an engineering perspective the principals of the project were certainly feasible (double-ended, bogies, air-smoothed, reduced prep/maintenance etc), but this deviated to such a degree by the completion of 36001 that its design had too many hostages to fortune.  Remove some of those (valves, weight etc - many moderately simple to redesign if reworking from scratch) and it could certainly have worked.  Whether the end result of this could be considered a 'Leader' is another thing.  

 

As to the socio-economic standpoint, the question stands whether the above would have been feasible even if it worked perfectly.  Between pro-diesel agendas, desires to look more modern, reducing tolerance for steam working conditions, contracting financial outlay etc etc these draw many doubts over the project that have little bearing on the engineering alone.  In my mind there are comparisons with the British airship R101: pushed ahead technologically and politically, the inquiry into its disastrous end literally stated '...originality and courage in design are not to be depreciated, but there is an obvious danger in giving too many separate hostages to fortune at one time.'

 

Regarding one tiny element of the original post not covered thereafter, that of Leader as a modelling project, I can also report that it is now available as a kit in N Gauge (and scratch aid in O Gauge) in pieces via Shapeways.  https://www.shapeways.com/product/NKY8K7HSX/n-gauge-bulleid-leader-scratch-aid-body

[jonny777]

 I have revived this thread, because I discovered this poor quality photo amongst the images taken by the late Colin Major. I am assuming it is at Brighton Works and was taken in 1950, although no details are given.

 

It shows 6002 and another of the class behind, although I'm not sure which one that is; Wikipedia states that 6003 did not have any casing when the project was aborted, so maybe the rear one is 6001? The historical interest of the image makes up for the lack of sharpness. 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2019 by jonny777
Text makes more sense now.

[Nearholmer]

Fascinating.

 

Looks more like a running shed than works.

[Rudititanic]

Good to see, though can inform that it's 36002 & 03 at New Cross - very similar images are in K Robertson's final leader book.

[Edge]

There are large panels missing from the rear of the two pictured locomotives, so it is likely that it is 36003. From all accounts 36002 was only a few days away from its first run and was a considerably superior locomotive to the prototype.

 

that being said, the design itself was fundamentally flawed in being vastly overweight, underpowered, incapable of fitting in with existing infrastructure on the SR lines (the loco could barely take on water because of issues actually fitting the spouts of water towers into the loco) and thoroughly unpopular with the unions of the time because of the isolation of the fireman from the driver (and the alleged high temperatres for the fireman, althoguh reports about their actual experience was contradictory from man to man who worked on the engine).

[uax6]

The panel that you can see along the side of the rear loco (which is 36003) is the corridor edge water tank. This was an attempt to balance the offset boiler. The fact that the amount of water in it must have gone down at some point seems to have been forgotten! Also that many tons of brake blocks where stacked in 36001’s corridor to correct the balance too.

It is said that just the spring covers and glazing were required for 36002, two days work, and she would have been ready for the road. An interesting what if, would she have performed any better (not having had con rods bent and then straightened out? And what mods were done to her?)

 

andy g