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

3 hours ago, runs as required said:

Having been introduced to the Museum of Retro-Technology  I think I'm now more than ever, as a Time Waster, unlikely to do anything else remotely useful in life.

dh

 

The thing I find so incredible about these contraptions, is that all of them must have been through sufficient technical scrutiny and review to persuade the relevant people to spend quite considerable sums of money building and testing them. 

 

It’s a different case with those American horrors (like the one with multiple driving wheels stacked one above the other) which never existed except in the overheated minds of their promoters - ink and paper are cheap - but most of these are real engineering, which real engineers with real experience expected to work..

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
35 minutes ago, JimC said:

 

big banker.jpg

 

It possibly might even need to be a 2-8-4. King boiler, basically 4700 chassis, bits from 42 and 72.

 

35 minutes ago, JimC said:

 

big banker.jpg

 

It possibly might even need to be a 2-8-4. King boiler, basically 4700 chassis, bits from 42 and 72.

2-8-4 I reckon or you won’t be able to carry enough coal for more than a few  miles off shed, and you need as many wheels as you can to distribute the axle load, the loco’s biggest problem!  Suggest 88xx, 89xx, 98xx, 99xx for mixed traffic number series, but 76xx is possible for a mixed traffic tank engine. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rockershovel said:

I'm no hand with these photo editing pages, but I'd expect an 0-8-0PT to be along these lines..

I'm had a quick look and had trouble locating the firebox and ashpan relative to the axles. Given a std 10 boiler the front of the firebox must be between wheels. If its between 2nd and 3rd I reckon too much of the weight of the loco is on the first two pairs of wheels, but if its between 3rd and 4th then the back will be heavy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JimC said:

I'm had a quick look and had trouble locating the firebox and ashpan relative to the axles. Given a std 10 boiler the front of the firebox must be between wheels. If its between 2nd and 3rd I reckon too much of the weight of the loco is on the first two pairs of wheels, but if its between 3rd and 4th then the back will be heavy.

 

Well, yes. There’s usually a reason why these neverwazzers didn’t exist. The GWR knew quite a lot about both eight-wheeled, and eight-coupled locomotives and never built an 0-8-0 of any description. I couldn’t make the boiler layout work, either. 

 

I spent a little while comparing weight and TE figures and came to the conclusion that in British design, there was a step change between six-coupled, and eight-coupled locomotives generally, and that an 0-8-0T wasn’t useful or viable for any likely use, given the size of the boiler required, the tank capacity, the overall weight and minimum radius. 

 

There WERE (rare) 0-8-0T types, the SR Z class was a rather magnificent looking thing and seems to have been successful - but the overall conclusion must be that they had no general application and even for the short-range, brute-power applications where eight-coupled tanks were used, carrying wheels were preferable 9B203B9C-923C-41B7-9D8B-FB5B509CE923.jpeg.e01c5e1bd689342ebb9a84495f2b814f.jpeg

 

 

Edited by rockershovel
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, rockershovel said:

 

Well, yes. There’s usually a reason why these neverwazzers didn’t exist. The GWR knew quite a lot about both eight-wheeled, and eight-coupled locomotives and never built an 0-8-0 of any description. I couldn’t make the boiler layout work, either.

 

 

The LNWR seems to have come to the same conclusion as they built 0-8-0s, 2-8-0s, 0-8-2Ts & 0-8-4Ts but no 0-8-0Ts

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
32 minutes ago, melmerby said:

The LNWR seems to have come to the same conclusion as they built 0-8-0s, 2-8-0s, 0-8-2Ts & 0-8-4Ts but no 0-8-0Ts

 

Though the 2-8-0s were rebuilds of 0-8-0s - Webb's 4-cylinder compounds that were particularly heavy at the front end. Replacing -0 with -2T was a standard Crewe manoeuver.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The GE made do with three driving axles when others had four resulting in the J20. At the time of its introduction the most powerful 0-6-0 built in this country, only surpassed later by the Bulleid Q. (Now there's one that could easily be stretched to 0-8-0).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Though the 2-8-0s were rebuilds of 0-8-0s - Webb's 4-cylinder compounds that were particularly heavy at the front end. Replacing -0 with -2T was a standard Crewe manoeuver.

The 2-8-0 version just doesn't look right IMHO.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/09/2019 at 12:54, runs as required said:

Having been introduced to the Museum of Retro-Technology  I think I'm now more than ever, as a Time Waster, unlikely to do anything else remotely useful in life.

 

That is a dangerous website, I've just wasted an entire HOUR* browsing through a couple of sections!

 

But thanks for drawing it to our attention...

 

* An hour which I could have wasted on RMWeb!

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RedGemAlchemist said:

Looks a bit like my freelance 0-8-0T Baldwin.

DSC_0212.JPG.f497e9cfa79f9df114ff7fc5f1f66436.JPG

I built it for hauling quarry trains. 

As photographed it appears to be (craftsmanship/clever) a quarry loco for steeply inclined quarry tracks where the boiler fire-box top has be kept horizontal and covered.

dh

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, runs as required said:

As photographed it appears to be (craftsmanship/clever) a quarry loco for steeply inclined quarry tracks where the boiler fire-box top has be kept horizontal and covered.

dh

At least it looks like it could do the job I intended.

 

14 hours ago, rockershovel said:

I think its an optical illusion due to the sloping tank tops? 

I think it is. According to my spirit level the boiler is near enough dead straight.

 

10 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I think it looks more like someone took everything they had in their spares box and glued it together.

Indeed it does. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Do you think your imaginary locomotive will never be made by a model manufacturer?

Fear not. I give you not one, not two, but three versions of the neverwazzer DRG class 53:

marklin-ho-3302-drg-class-53-borsig_1_a6

 

 

 

900_37024.jpg

 

image.png

 

Courtesy of Maerklin 

 

Edited by melmerby
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just suppose in the early 1950s the Southern region was looking for 4MT and 5MT class locos particularly for their West of England Services to Exeter, Plymouth and the North Cornwall lines.

Perhaps if they were not willing to accept the new British Rail Standard classes and Bulleid still remained as Chief Locomotive Engineer they may have tried to come up with something using established Southern Railway components and practices.

 

So just imagine the wheels and works from a Bulleid West Country pacific and the excellent medium-sized boiler form the Schools class to provide the power. It could either be a 2 cylinder or a slightly more powerful but heavier 3 cylinder type like its West Country class parent. The Southern railway maverick engineers have retained the Bulleid chain-driven valve gear and perhaps even used the more efficient poppet valve gear, still driven by Mr Bulleid's bicycle chain system. It is hard to tell from the picture.

 

IMGP0086a.JPG.122a86ee0400c9e2e6a78b9a2fc88447.JPG

 

Here we see a test of different tenders, to provide coal and water for the extended range available from a large tender needed for a run down to the far west of England. They are preparing for trials and as a comparison, some time will be spent using the old Sou'western 8 wheeler and the big Bulleid 6 wheeler.

 

IMGP0080a.JPG.769df718e899150843514b4875c87599.JPG

 

Which will be best?

 

Maybe even to be ultra-modern and labour saving there will be an oil-burning example of this loco, always hoping for a handy type that can do everything a Bulleid pacific can but at a much cheaper price.

 

Once the best option is found the loco can be sent away for its final painting.

 

Why does this experiment take place at an out of the way siding far from the notice and control of the national British Railways big wigs? Politics, of course, those maverick engineers of the Southern Region hope to present a coup, a shazam, a new class of versatile and inexpensive loco, a new and proven working “here one we have done earlier”.

 

It could be could the New Skools class or the Bulleid Schools or the BS 1.

 

  • Like 8
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Can't help thinking that a more Bulleid-ish cab, perhaps the Q1's, would have been used, possibly with a Q1 style of boiler of around the same dimension as the Schools.  A lighter version of the S15 mixed traffic 4-6-0s that could have been used on the branches west of Okehampton would have been a very useful loco, and cheaper to run than the Pacifics and since the BR 4MT 4-6-0 and 2-6-0 were too heavy for this work it is possible that Eastleigh might have been allowed to come up with it's own solution.  I envisage it with electric lighting including the instrument lighting from the pacifics and a more angular styling at the front.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Can't help thinking that a more Bulleid-ish cab, perhaps the Q1's, would have been used

 

The Q1 cab would be bang on trend and would match the profile of the Bulleid tender. Perhaps something similar could be carved from the Dapol B of B kit?  I think for the post-war period a simple all-welded boiler would be fine (unless they decided to air-smooth the thing). It does need a proper cylindrical smokebox on a saddle, though, rather than the D-shaped Schools smokebox which is bit antique by this time.

 

All in all it's a really nice what-if and with everything welded might be lighter than it appears, but I think it would struggle to come in at a lower axle loading than a 4MT. Perhaps even Bulleid would see sense and drive the poppet valves with bevel gears.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, relaxinghobby said:

Just suppose in the early 1950s the Southern region was looking for 4MT and 5MT class locos particularly for their West of England Services to Exeter, Plymouth and the North Cornwall lines.

Perhaps if they were not willing to accept the new British Rail Standard classes and Bulleid still remained as Chief Locomotive Engineer they may have tried to come up with something using established Southern Railway components and practices.

 

So just imagine the wheels and works from a Bulleid West Country pacific and the excellent medium-sized boiler form the Schools class to provide the power. It could either be a 2 cylinder or a slightly more powerful but heavier 3 cylinder type like its West Country class parent. The Southern railway maverick engineers have retained the Bulleid chain-driven valve gear and perhaps even used the more efficient poppet valve gear, still driven by Mr Bulleid's bicycle chain system. It is hard to tell from the picture.

 

IMGP0086a.JPG.122a86ee0400c9e2e6a78b9a2fc88447.JPG

 

Here we see a test of different tenders, to provide coal and water for the extended range available from a large tender needed for a run down to the far west of England. They are preparing for trials and as a comparison, some time will be spent using the old Sou'western 8 wheeler and the big Bulleid 6 wheeler.

 

IMGP0080a.JPG.769df718e899150843514b4875c87599.JPG

 

Which will be best?

 

Maybe even to be ultra-modern and labour saving there will be an oil-burning example of this loco, always hoping for a handy type that can do everything a Bulleid pacific can but at a much cheaper price.

 

Once the best option is found the loco can be sent away for its final painting.

 

Why does this experiment take place at an out of the way siding far from the notice and control of the national British Railways big wigs? Politics, of course, those maverick engineers of the Southern Region hope to present a coup, a shazam, a new class of versatile and inexpensive loco, a new and proven working “here one we have done earlier”.

 

It could be could the New Skools class or the Bulleid Schools or the BS 1.

 

That's a locomotive that's right up my alley! Well done!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
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...