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.

Imaginary Locomotives


Recommended Posts

What about a B12 chassis? The B12 has a coupled wheelbase of 7' + 7' and the driving wheel diameter is 6' 6". The GCR pacific has 6' 6" wheels and a 7' 3" + 7' 3" driving wheelbase. The chassis looks quite similar (in my opinion) when comparing drawings:

 

46F15091-2C1E-42E8-88D3-BDD7D85ABBF5.jpeg

holden1500.JPG

 

Here is where I found the B12 drawings: https://steammemories.blogspot.com/2011/08/precursors-to-b17-on-ger-before.html

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting thought. You loose the 1mm compromise on the driving wheel diameter. But have a 1mm difference in driving wheel spacing.  The distance to the bogie is too long, ( which can be altered) . Which would be more noticeable?

It is always the case when using a donor, that you have to decide which compromises you will accept. 

Richard

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, richard i said:

An interesting thought. You loose the 1mm compromise on the driving wheel diameter. But have a 1mm difference in driving wheel spacing.  The distance to the bogie is too long, ( which can be altered) . Which would be more noticeable?

It is always the case when using a donor, that you have to decide which compromises you will accept. 

Richard

 

If I was making it from a B12 chassis, I would most likely remove the pony truck entirely and scratchbuild a new one.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Justang said:

What about a B12 chassis? The B12 has a coupled wheelbase of 7' + 7' and the driving wheel diameter is 6' 6". The GCR pacific has 6' 6" wheels and a 7' 3" + 7' 3" driving wheelbase. The chassis looks quite similar (in my opinion) when comparing drawings:

 

46F15091-2C1E-42E8-88D3-BDD7D85ABBF5.jpeg

holden1500.JPG

 

Here is where I found the B12 drawings: https://steammemories.blogspot.com/2011/08/precursors-to-b17-on-ger-before.html

The problem with using the B12 chassis is the 8' between the front driving axle and the rear driving wheel, which is far greater than the 5'6" on the Gresley pacific.

 

I personally think that it's a great shame that the 2-6-4 wheel arrangement wasn't used on a tender locomotive in the UK.  Think of a V2 with a rear end along the lines of the W1 4-6-4, perhaps an A4 boiler and the 50sq/ft firebox of the P2's, re-built W1 and later pacifics for a powerful and fast mixed traffic locomotive.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Traintresta said:

The problem with using the B12 chassis is the 8' between the front driving axle and the rear driving wheel, which is far greater than the 5'6" on the Gresley pacific.

 

I personally think that it's a great shame that the 2-6-4 wheel arrangement wasn't used on a tender locomotive in the UK.  Think of a V2 with a rear end along the lines of the W1 4-6-4, perhaps an A4 boiler and the 50sq/ft firebox of the P2's, re-built W1 and later pacifics for a powerful and fast mixed traffic locomotive.

 

 

Or go the whole hog and have a 2-8-4 like the USA did very successfully with the Berkshires. 

Unsure what it is, think polar express, though I do not believe the originals could pull trains across sheet ice.

richard

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I think that sentiment has been most of the thrust of the recent discussion about it, Rockershovel.  If it was ever a serious proposal, the only conclusion I can come to is that the GC wanted to beat the NER and GNR to the punch with a pacific for publicity purposes, despite the GW having already done it and not emerged as happy bunnies from the experience!

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 16/05/2019 at 17:41, Ravenser said:

 

 

I was thinking of the Quayside electrics ES1 . But they'd be a bit vintage by 1931. The horsepower quoted implies what the USA called a "road switcher" - an 08 is just 350hp

 

26510 was a Bo-Bo centre cab loco in use as a shunter at Ilford in 1500V DC days, so not an unthinkable idea.

 

26510-S.jpg

https://transportsofdelight.smugmug.com/RAILWAYS/BRITISH-DIESEL-AND-ELECTRIC/PRE-BR/i-j46fS4w/A

 

No 25KV replacement unfortunately in 1959 - probably got used to using an 08 shunter so did not worry too much. No suitable single cab 25KV locos around in the UK to do the job - would have to import from France...

 

300px-Locomotive_BB-12000,_%C3%A0_l'entr

 

... but Deltic levels of horsepower probably a bit big for use as a shunter. Could Alsthom have made something smaller?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, richard i said:

Or go the whole hog and have a 2-8-4 like the USA did very successfully with the Berkshires. 

Unsure what it is, think polar express, though I do not believe the originals could pull trains across sheet ice.

richard

I don't know, with a UK sized train of 4 wheel wagons, if the ice were thick enough...

 

I can imagine the LNER P1 might have been more successful as a 5'8" driver 2-6-4.

 

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

That’s an odd-looking Pacific, with its trailing truck way behind the firebox; makes you wonder what purpose it serves? 726322C7-984C-4951-80CE-66D23756E587.jpeg.46bd169d7e605f71c27ce51a1ead3433.jpeg

This seems to have been a more common think on narrow gauge designs, hence my conclusion was that it was to reduce the axle loading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 minutes ago, Traintresta said:

I don't know, with a UK sized train of 4 wheel wagons, if the ice were thick enough...

 

 

I recall reading that while the Transiberian Railway was still under construction, one winter rails were laid across Lake Baikal - this might be a myth, though in the summer months a train ferry was used until the line around the southern end of the lake was complete.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I recall reading that while the Transiberian Railway was still under construction, one winter rails were laid across Lake Baikal - this might be a myth, though in the summer months a train ferry was used until the line around the southern end of the lake was complete.

Truth stranger than fiction???

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Suzie said:

No 25KV replacement unfortunately in 1959 - probably got used to using an 08 shunter so did not worry too much. No suitable single cab 25KV locos around in the UK to do the job - would have to import from France...

 

300px-Locomotive_BB-12000,_%C3%A0_l'entr

 

... but Deltic levels of horsepower probably a bit big for use as a shunter. Could Alsthom have made something smaller?

 

Depends what you want to do with it. In Australia shunting some trains of slab steel requires 3000+hp main line locos, noting of course that TE is more important than hp at low speed but nothing else will get them moving.

 

Cheers

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Traintresta said:

 

I personally think that it's a great shame that the 2-6-4 wheel arrangement wasn't used on a tender locomotive in the UK.  Think of a V2 with a rear end along the lines of the W1 4-6-4, perhaps an A4 boiler and the 50sq/ft firebox of the P2's, re-built W1 and later pacifics for a powerful and fast mixed traffic locomotive.

The only 2-6-4 tender locomotives were, I believe, a South African 2-6-2 class rebuilt to 2-6-4s because of instability, and two classes of Austrian express passenger locomotive. The latter classes seem to have been semi-articulated, with the first pair of drivers mounted on the leading bogie with some clever engineering.

 

I suspect that, in general, it's hard to design a 6-coupled locomotive that can use enough steam to justify a big firebox with two axles supporting it. Trying to get lots of power on a low axle loading is about the only time I can think it might be worthwhile - the Austrian 2-6-4s had a 15 ton axle load.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RLBH said:

The only 2-6-4 tender locomotives were, I believe, a South African 2-6-2 class rebuilt to 2-6-4s because of instability, and two classes of Austrian express passenger locomotive. The latter classes seem to have been semi-articulated, with the first pair of drivers mounted on the leading bogie with some clever engineering.

 

I suspect that, in general, it's hard to design a 6-coupled locomotive that can use enough steam to justify a big firebox with two axles supporting it. Trying to get lots of power on a low axle loading is about the only time I can think it might be worthwhile - the Austrian 2-6-4s had a 15 ton axle load.

Very true, and it’s hard to justify its use for these reasons but looking at the faults of the proposed GCR Pacific lead me to look into 4-6-4’s and then 2-6-4’s once again. I did wonder if it could have been an alternative to Gresleys 2-8-2 classes?

 

That GCR Pacific would probably benefit from the addition of a longer boiler and much larger firebox, hence 4-6-4 camevto mind. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
10 hours ago, DavidB-AU said:

 

Depends what you want to do with it. In Australia shunting some trains of slab steel requires 3000+hp main line locos, noting of course that TE is more important than hp at low speed but nothing else will get them moving.

 

Cheers

David

I once watched an 08, all mighty 350hp of it, drag a 3,600 ton train of steel coil out of Cardiff Tidal Sidings to shunt into 3 1,200 ton trains, one of which I worked to Gloucester as guard; this was in the 70s.  It took about 40 minutes to pass the shunter's cabin, but was very impressive!  Trains were Bogie Bolster Es, vacuum fitted, maximum speed about equal to continental drift, but the loco neither slipped nor stalled.  Not sure the loco coupling was rated for the load, and it may have been a bit longer when the move finished!

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RLBH said:

The only 2-6-4 tender locomotives were, I believe, a South African 2-6-2 class rebuilt to 2-6-4s because of instability, and two classes of Austrian express passenger locomotive. The latter classes seem to have been semi-articulated, with the first pair of drivers mounted on the leading bogie with some clever engineering.

 

I suspect that, in general, it's hard to design a 6-coupled locomotive that can use enough steam to justify a big firebox with two axles supporting it. Trying to get lots of power on a low axle loading is about the only time I can think it might be worthwhile - the Austrian 2-6-4s had a 15 ton axle load.

A book I had as a child ("Railways in the Pre-Eminence of Steam") described the Austrian 2-6-4 as Golsdorf's masterpiece. It was for many years my favourite loco. Here's  a picture

 

Austria Railways - Austrian State Railways (BBÖ) Gölsdorf type Class 310 2-6-4 steam locomotive

 

I was expecting to post only a link but it has embedded the picture itself; you can see the "clever engineering".

  • Like 2
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
36 minutes ago, The Lurker said:

A book I had as a child ("Railways in the Pre-Eminence of Steam") described the Austrian 2-6-4 as Golsdorf's masterpiece. It was for many years my favourite loco. Here's  a picture

 

Austria Railways - Austrian State Railways (BBÖ) Gölsdorf type Class 310 2-6-4 steam locomotive

 

I was expecting to post only a link but it has embedded the picture itself; you can see the "clever engineering".

I suppose the beauty of the 2-6-4 tender wheel arrangement is it not only allows a large firebox, but also allows more room for large cylinders at the front end, particularly important on the restricted UK loading gauge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

If it's useful, the Bachmann 'Henry' and 'Gordon' use the same chassis and wheels as each other


Wheel dia
21.6789mm
= 5.4055ft in 1/76

 

Coupled wheelbase
49.0347mm
= 12.2265ft in 1/76

 

 

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RLBH said:

The only 2-6-4 tender locomotives were, I believe, a South African 2-6-2 class rebuilt to 2-6-4s because of instability, and two classes of Austrian express passenger locomotive. The latter classes seem to have been semi-articulated, with the first pair of drivers mounted on the leading bogie with some clever engineering.

 

I suspect that, in general, it's hard to design a 6-coupled locomotive that can use enough steam to justify a big firebox with two axles supporting it. Trying to get lots of power on a low axle loading is about the only time I can think it might be worthwhile - the Austrian 2-6-4s had a 15 ton axle load.

 

4 hours ago, Traintresta said:

Very true, and it’s hard to justify its use for these reasons but looking at the faults of the proposed GCR Pacific lead me to look into 4-6-4’s and then 2-6-4’s once again. I did wonder if it could have been an alternative to Gresleys 2-8-2 classes?

 

That GCR Pacific would probably benefit from the addition of a longer boiler and much larger firebox, hence 4-6-4 camevto mind. 

Hmm. Either way it could be interesting. Personally if you can justify a design "in-world" in a way that makes actual logical sense then I'd say go ahead. Plus I love unusual or unique wheel arrangements so I'd be really interested to see something like this.

 

 Also interesting bit of info Corbs. Didn't realise that. Hmm. 

Edited by RedGemAlchemist
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, The Lurker said:

A book I had as a child ("Railways in the Pre-Eminence of Steam") described the Austrian 2-6-4 as Golsdorf's masterpiece. It was for many years my favourite loco. Here's  a picture

 

Austria Railways - Austrian State Railways (BBÖ) Gölsdorf type Class 310 2-6-4 steam locomotive

 

I was expecting to post only a link but it has embedded the picture itself; you can see the "clever engineering".

 

Would be a b****r to model if you wanted to go round R2 curves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Would be a b****r to model if you wanted to go round R2 curves.

If it came from Marklin, they tend to articulate frames to allow for trainset curves.   Their ten-coupled locos come to mind.    Having the first axle follow the pilot would do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 28/05/2019 at 16:46, Traintresta said:

I personally think that it's a great shame that the 2-6-4 wheel arrangement wasn't used on a tender locomotive in the UK.  Think of a V2 with a rear end along the lines of the W1 4-6-4, perhaps an A4 boiler and the 50sq/ft firebox of the P2's, re-built W1 and later pacifics for a powerful and fast mixed traffic locomotive.

 

So you look for a UK 2-6-4 tender locomotive (project)? I recommend BackTrack vol. 33. no. 5, the May 2019 issue. L A Summers outlined such a diagram of a never-built LNER locomotive in his article on page 316. Indeed a large grate locomotive over a four wheeled trailer should have found some use in UK.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Corbs said:

If it's useful, the Bachmann 'Henry' and 'Gordon' use the same chassis and wheels as each other


Wheel dia
21.6789mm
= 5.4055ft in 1/76

 

Coupled wheelbase
49.0347mm
= 12.2265ft in 1/76

 

 

Suppose someone took the Bachmann Thomas models and made them more RWS-esque?

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, rockershovel said:

That’s an odd-looking Pacific, with its trailing truck way behind the firebox; makes you wonder what purpose it serves?

 

The French NORD Pacifics Class 3.1151-3.1170 looked very similar but with a much larger trailer wheel-set. It was quite common practice in France, Alasce-Lorraine, SACM Belfort Works. The real reason for this arrangement was a long, deep fierbox. DJH had/has(?) such a French Pacific on its range of foreign H0 locos.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...