Jump to content

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

As mentioned in the description, this is a continuation of the various Fictional Designs of the 'Mk2 BG Full Brake' thread. I will say it now, NO BOARDROOMIFICATION PLEASE! There is a separate thread titled 'Imaginary Boardrooms' so TRY KEEP THIS THREAD ON TRACK!

 

Thank you, now you may post YOUR Fictional Designs HERE!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then may I present the Armstrong Whitworth 'Skye class' diesel electric railcar. Ignoring, for the time being, the articulated and power-house plus rakes that they were also involved with, which are more closely related to the locomotive designs, AW produced several different designs of railcar for broad, standard and narrow gauges. One of the smaller designs, that built for the North Western in India that ran on the Kalka-Simla line still exists in the Indian Railway Museum (2nd unit down).This was quite a small affair that ran on its own, providing a premium service on the line, most AW railcars though were designed with multiple working and trailer haulage in mind, some combined with driving trailers and it was this latter theme I was looking to develop.
A curious part-bogie railcar built for the GBSR in India had this ability. The chassis of this 2ft 6in gauge beast was tested on the Leek and Manifold Railway in 1932. A larger 2' 6" bogie railcar followed in 1934 for the GIPR, the DT41. In common with most of their lighter railcars this was powered by an Armstrong-Saurer diesel engine. This were much more compact than the big Armstrong-Sulzer engines, as I used in AW250, so although the engine compartment was above the floor, rather than below it, it was only about a single compartment length long. It has to be said that bodily DT41 was hardly a thing of beauty, but was a very practical design. Unfortunately there's no picture online, but it is mentioned on this page (scroll down). There are drawings and photographs in the Armstrong Whitworth Diesel Pioneers book. Transmission is electric, a motor under the floor driving the bogie via a cardan shaft.
As it was exported simply as a chassis, it is obvious that bodywork could have been 'to taste'. Park Royal were well-known and were involved in a number of railway contracts, including several in conjunction with AW. Those I've taken inspiration from are DT16, a standard gauge railcar of 1933 (ironically, in view of what I said above, this actually does have an underfloor engine, resulting in very tiered seating!) and DT71, a batch of railcars for Western Australia, 3' 6" gauge delivered in 1937, right at the end of their diesel rail traction venture.
So there's the inspiration. For the specification, what was needed was both railcars and driving trailers for 2' 6" gauge, capable of being worked in multiple with each other and an AW locomotive. The 45 foot of DT41 was a bit too long, though the 7' 6" width and approx 10' height was about right. The length was brought down to 38 foot over headstocks and bogie wheelbase from 4' 6" to 3' 6". The railcar itself has two driving cabs, so it can be used singly, engine compartment, guard's/luggage compartment and two Third class saloons. The driving trailer as a driving cab, one First class and two Third class saloons. They are shown here in LNER 'Tourist' livery:

 

post-1877-0-94930500-1512507902_thumb.jpg

 

Developing the family: by mounting the motor and generator in line (perhaps a little inspired by the contemporary AEC 'Q' buses), alongside the radiator which remains as before, there is sufficient room for a through public gangway (note the 3" thick, sound-proofed walls). Combined with the through gangway cab already designed this could allow fully flexible operation with up to four twin sets in multiple operation:

 

post-1877-0-70743400-1512507977.jpg

 

A few possible configurations for power/trailer corridor sets:

 

post-1877-0-53336400-1512507987.jpg

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

OK, how about something standard gauge? In 1951 English Electric delivered some rather impressive articulated diesel electric units to Egyptian Railways (along with mainline locos and shunters). At least one of the units was actually tested in the UK before delivery. The express versions had air conditioning too (which would have been considered a bit OTT for Britain in 1950) so a UK version might actually have more power available for traction. Of course, the basic arrangement in rather more mundane form went on to reliable success for many years as the 'Thumper' units. More details on them here. Here's my UK version:

 

post-1877-0-37067800-1516134453.jpg

Edited by BernardTPM
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

With respect to post #2, the railway dismantlers on Shelf Island have acquired an apparently unused body shell bearing an excellent family likeness to the Skye unit:

post-14389-0-51526300-1516297674_thumb.jpg

 

The width of the body represents 2,700 mm, which appears to align quite ideally with the dimensions of other trains on the line.

 

The Chief Engineer of the railway has taken a bit of a shine to this unit, and is intending to invite the local transport preservation group to build the body onto a suitable modern chassis. The group have responded most promptly with this computer-generated image, showing a possible 4-wheel arrangement based on a self-powered crane. The group are emphasising, their chassis will have two traction motors, one on each axle, and this is not a mechanical transmission:

post-14389-0-07692700-1516297675_thumb.jpg

 

Do we know whether the draughtsmen of the time considered this kind of arrangement? It would seem to lend itself to the relatively bulky traction motors of the day. Also it might represent a forerunner to the 4-wheeled mechanical rail buses seen on the mainland during the 1960s.

 

- Richard.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to post #2, the railway dismantlers on Shelf Island have acquired an apparently unused body shell bearing an excellent family likeness to the Skye unit:

 

The width of the body represents 2,700 mm, which appears to align quite ideally with the dimensions of other trains on the line.

The Chief Engineer of the railway has taken a bit of a shine to this unit, and is intending to invite the local transport preservation group to build the body onto a suitable modern chassis. The group have responded most promptly with this computer-generated image, showing a possible 4-wheel arrangement based on a self-powered crane. The group are emphasising, their chassis will have two traction motors, one on each axle, and this is not a mechanical transmission:

Do we know whether the draughtsmen of the time considered this kind of arrangement? It would seem to lend itself to the relatively bulky traction motors of the day. Also it might represent a forerunner to the 4-wheeled mechanical rail buses seen on the mainland during the 1960s.

The body is indeed based on the Skye units, but smaller, done by Teebee (Tom Bell).

Two traction motors are quite unnecesssary, the bogie units have just one traction motor fixed under the floor and driving the inner axle of one bogie via a cardan shaft and worm gear - this is the actual arrangement used on the Armstrong Whitworth DT41 mentioned above. A smaller diesel electric railcar chassis (for DT12) was tested on the Leek and Manifold in 1932. This had an unpowered bogie and a single 'fixed' axle (again driven by shaft and worm) which I would suggest would look correct under the shorter body (as well as following the contemporary practice). The bodywork was local, built in India, but the bodywork style I used was based on Park Royal designs.

Edited by BernardTPM
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

I knew the maker was someone trading as -ee -ee but the name was lost. Good.

 

The Treasurer has made a positive if cautious response to the 11+A  (or 4-2-0) drive arrangement. I particular he has made a poignant recollection of the railway's experience with a Tenshodo product with only one axle driven, and he requires a 1A+A configuration as a minimum. A set of un-driven wheels will be added on a sliding axle, outside the 4-wheel powered wheelbase, at about 4'6" centres. Funds are released to acquire a suitable OWB mechanism.

 

I think this will make up into a really nice little model. The body shell has moved from the box of 'layout parts' to the box of 'parts for layout'

 

- Richard.

Edited by 47137
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 8 months later...
  • RMweb Gold

The body is indeed based on the Skye units, but smaller, done by Teebee (Tom Bell).

Two traction motors are quite unnecesssary, the bogie units have just one traction motor fixed under the floor and driving the inner axle of one bogie via a cardan shaft and worm gear - this is the actual arrangement used on the Armstrong Whitworth DT41 mentioned above. A smaller diesel electric railcar chassis (for DT12) was tested on the Leek and Manifold in 1932. This had an unpowered bogie and a single 'fixed' axle (again driven by shaft and worm) which I would suggest would look correct under the shorter body (as well as following the contemporary practice). The bodywork was local, built in India, but the bodywork style I used was based on Park Royal designs.

 

I've just bought one of these, made by Bachmann and marked 'Joella Productions' so one of the Underground Ernie characters:

post-14389-0-09186700-1543747401.jpg

 

In 1:87 scale, this has a bogie wheelbase of 2.1 m and bogie centres 6 m, wheel diameter 0.9 m.

 

The DT12 order was for lines with gradients of 1:100, so a twin-bogie design seems sensible for a steeper line like mine, although I realise this puts one traction motor in or hopefully under the passenger compartment. The use of 0.9 m wheels means the railcar will be for use with high (British) style platforms, which suits the line too. The only real downside is the chassis takes up so much space I will not be able to model the interior, which I really wanted to do. So, I suppose the project can stay as something for a rainy day for a bit longer.

 

- Richard.

Edited by 47137
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just bought one of these, made by Bachmann and marked 'Joella Productions' so one of the Underground Ernie characters:

attachicon.gifDSCF8623.jpg

 

In 1:87 scale, this has a bogie wheelbase of 2.1 m and bogie centres 6 m, wheel diameter 0.9 m.

 

The DT12 order was for lines with gradients of 1:100, so a twin-bogie design seems sensible for a steeper line like mine, although I realise this puts one traction motor in or hopefully under the passenger compartment. The use of 0.9 m wheels means the railcar will be for use with high (British) style platforms, which suits the line too. The only real downside is the chassis takes up so much space I will not be able to model the interior, which I really wanted to do. So, I suppose the project can stay as something for a rainy day for a bit longer.

 

- Richard.

Richard, you could always give an impression of the interior using a flat picture to represent the passengers and seating, and apply a slight tint to the windows.

Failing that, you could black out the windows and call it a parcels car.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

These are all good ideas. What I would like to try is to modify the non-powered bogie and this end of the chassis to make a new floor with a simpler pivot. This would make room for a piece of interior from a Lima restaurant car with 2+1 seating. I've got a complete Underground Ernie "Suzie" on order to look at too.

 

The idea is to make what I will provisionally call a 'Kyle' class railcar. This was built for private hire by shooting parties and gentry on the mainland to give them connections to the Skye ferry. The prototype would have been designed around the same time as the Skye class, hence the family likeness. There is room for 24 first class seats plus the guard's compartment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

That's not a train; it's an apartment block that has been fitted with wheels. What are those things on the roof?

The third class seats.

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to propose the Galloper family of DEMU, based around an assumption that the railways were in much better shape in the late 1980s, with high passenger numbers and a healthy parcels service. I envisage them as an express DEMU for regional express, inter-regional and secondary intercity routes - basically the duties of Class 158s and Class 159s, and taking over from InterCity Cross Country's Class 47 hauled coaching stock.

 

The Gallopers are basically a 100mph proto-Voyager, drawing heavily on the Class 158/159 and Class 442 designs of that time. As such, they should have air conditioning, toilet retention tanks, and power operated internal and external doors. For preference, the styling on the ends should resemble that on a Class 442 (because the 158 has the aesthetics of the broad side of a barn) but with Class 158-type twin-leaf plug doors.

 

Power is supplied by a single Cummins NT1140R1 generator of 480hp under the floor of each coach, driving traction motors on the inner axle of each bogie; individual cars are therefore 1A-A1. Later units may have uprated NT1140R3 engines of 550hp. I'm not certain that this engine actually existed, but it's basically a QSK19 (same manufacturer, same bore and stroke) with power ratings appropriate for 1988-1991 - there's nothing about it that would be technically difficult. With the greater efficiency of diesel-electric over diesel-hydraulic transmission, I suspect they'll probably be good for 105mph, and I'd be looking for lightweight construction so that SP differential speeds can be used.

 

I'm envisaging five classes of passenger-carrying unit, plus a motor van for parcels traffic, luggage and the likes. Classes 650/0 and 651/0 would be, in effect, 23m diesel-electric versions of the AM9 and 4Big/4Cig units.  Class 650/1 is very much like an updated Class 119/120 first-generation cross-country unit, complete with miniature buffet, for long-distance regional services.  The Class 652 units are suited for providing additional accommodation on buffet-fitted units, or for services where no buffet is required, and are basically 2-car and 3-car diesel-electric Class 158/159 units with half a coach of van space.

 

Class 657 motor vans are fitted with two large doors on each side of the body, allowing standardised parcels trolleys to be handled along with bicycles and other unaccompanied baggage. Obviously this assumes retained parcels traffic, but the Class 657s would also be useful on things like InterCity Cross-Country routes to the West Country in holiday season.

 

Formations are:
650/0 - DMC, MBS, MRSB, DMC
650/1 - DMC, MSRMB, DMBS
651/0 - DMC, MBS, MS, DMC
652/0 - DMC, MS, DMBS
652/1 - DMS, DMBS
657 - DMV

 

With Sprinter-type control systems, the Gallopers can run in sets of up to six units, which is far more than might realistically be required - especially given four-coach units. I could see something like the Cornish Scot running as a fourteen-coach Galloper, with a 650/0, two 651s, and two 657s, making one of the longer formations to actually see service. Lots of permutations of six to ten coach trains are practical, which should cover most needs.

 

The weird class numbers, by the way, are a result of the alternate reality where these exist having a slightly different numbering system from our own - though not too difficult to figure out what's going on. ;)

Edited by RLBH
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold

I have been wondering what could have been the outcome if some replacement 4COR units had been required and Bulleid had designed them as "post-war all-steel" versions, in a similar way to the all-steel 2HAL units he produced.

 

I could imagine a set being made from a pair of semi-open brake thirds, a corridor composite and a corridor third from Bachmann's Bulleid coaches range, and using a Bulleid steel 4SUB front end but with a gangway connection on the front of it, and with the headcode box in the gangway door as was later done with the 4CEPs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.