Imaginary Locomotives

[The Johnster]

3 hours ago, JimC said:

A Std 2 boiler might be a better match than a Std 4. 

And, for a reconstruction, could be cosmetically fattened to Std 4 dimensions, but I don't see that a Std 2 has many advantages apart from weight and less coal consumption, and would be no easier to fit to the frames.  So, for a project to rebuld a visually accurate 26xx, you could presumably use Std 2 or 4 boiler, 57xx or similar wheels, 57xx or similar cylinders, 57xx or similar connecting rods, 57xx centre axle with cranks, 57xx or similar coupling rods. 

 

Ok, then, let's start with a 'rolling chassis' complete with cylinders, motion, and inside frames from a 57xx. Or similar.  The frames need to be extended forward to accomodate the leading pony truck,  and cosmetic dummy outside frames fabricated; these will add a good bit of weight as they have to be robust enough to mount the springs and handle that load.  Outside cranks for the coupling rods (08?) and extended axles.  Std 4 boiler if possible, from one of the as yet unrestored ex-Barry 8-coupled tanks probably, and a fabricated running plate and cab.

 

The result would be a working steam locomotive that looked like a 26xx, but would not work like a real 26xx; it would have far too much boiler for the cylinders and be somewhat inefficient.  Whether this is a deal breaker on a heritage railway is a matter for the railway concerned.  It would probably have the same performance as a 57xx but be more expensive to run, and might well be to heavy for many heritage operations. 

 

Overall not worth the bother IMHO, but a nice idea!  It ticks some of the boxes for reproduction locos in that there are plenty of no.4 boilers from unrestored 42/5205/72xx locos, and there are several of these in service or already restored so one would not be preventing the restoration of an accurate loco of a type already 'available'.  Likewise 57xx complete rolling chassis.  And, in both heritage and model terms, it is a farily large class that lasted in service for half a century, effectively replaced by the 72xx, and represents the Dean/Churchward transition period, of which only CoT is the current extant example.

 

This is the imaginary loco thread, though, so it's perfectly cromulent here!

Edited April 10, 2021 by The Johnster

[Clive Mortimore]

7 hours ago, Ramblin Rich said:

As said before, I think there should have been more 33s as eth became more widespread. I believe the same people styled the BRCW "Lion" and the Hymeks, so could we have a 2nd generation 33 with Lion styling?

Or going the other way, BRCW saved money on Lion by not using a styling company, coming out with a stretched Co-Co version of a 33 for the type 4 prototype...

You Rang?

[Mr Jorrox]

On 06/04/2021 at 16:35, ScottishRailFanatic said:

Remember the BR MLVs used for the Southern region? What if the SR pursued the concept a bit earlier on to assist on the boat trains? Apologies for the edit quality (rushed it a bit) but I thought it was an interesting concept.

I have the 'what if' running in my head more or less constantly and my principal 'what if' is that nationalisation did not happen so all sorts of things are imaginable.  One of the things that occurred to me was Southern luggage vans built to match Pullman cars.  Mine are painted overall burnt umber and lettered 'SOUTHERN', as the Pullman company had no reason to own them.  I also thought of MLVs, with six wheeled motor bogies, for the Newhaven boat trains.

[Budgie]

On 09/04/2021 at 15:41, DK123GWR said:

Also, I am planning to create a whole range of GWR light railway locomotives based on the 101, which in this universe was far more succesful than in real life. My first is an 0-4-0 tender engine with inside cylinders, and the first stages are already in the thread above. The only real limit on what can be done is your imagination.

How about outside cylinders and Walschaerts valve gear?

[DK123GWR]

29 minutes ago, Budgie said:

How about outside cylinders and Walschaerts valve gear?

Not unless I can find a suitable RTR chassis for it. I'm not yet at the level of being able to fit valve gear in places that aren't designed for it.

[MikeRich]

First time poster, but I've been inspired by some of the amazing ideas on this thread, so here goes...

 

What if English Electric had addressed the visibility problem on their Type 1s by sticking another cab on a lengthened frame? IMHO it's not as pretty as the original and it would have ended up double-heading freights anyway so perhaps it's wise it was never built.

 

Photoshopped from a pair of Bachmann images - just don't look too carefully...

 

[Mr Jorrox]

On 08/03/2021 at 09:35, PhilJ W said:

Yet diesels are far more efficient than steam. The reason is simple, with a steam engine energy is lost between the boiler and the cylinder. With any form of IC engine the energy is confined to the cylinder. 

Not so: energy goes out through the exhaust port, is absorbed by the crankshaft, pumps, generator, fans &c and by the traction motors.

[DK123GWR]

On 20/03/2021 at 14:06, DK123GWR said:

Thomas had just recovered from the fright Percy had given him, when he saw this:

I was fiddling with spares when I noticed that this body fitted onto a Bachmann Underground Ernie chassis (with the bogie covers, which foul the steps, removed). Does anyone know if this is the same size as a normal Railroad 08 body? I believe the body is the same as the Triang 08 - can anyone confirm this?

 

Feel free to invent a reason for the existence of a bo-bo 08 as well - I just noticed they fitted.

Further to this post, I have found a locomotive with broadly similar dimensions (wheelbase around 30cm too long for the UE chassis, total length around 2m too long for the 08 body - although this includes external walkways). It was built by English Electric for 1067mm (3.5ft) gauge railways in New Zealand - the DE class. The body of the loco broadly resembles a class 20, but pre-dates it by 6 years (and is also a year older than the class 08)

 

Perhaps EE at the same time as developing the class 08 for BR and the DE class for NZR, EE decided to produce a locomotive to evaluate the suitability of diesel power for trip workings in the UK market. This used a very similar mechanism to the DE class (660hp diesel-electric with a top speed of 55mph) but was externally styled to resemble the shunters it was already producing for BR. The locomotive was found to be reliable in service, although often underpowered for its role. EE adressed this issue with the 1000hp class 20, the most powerful of the type 1s, and the experience gained from this prototype is often credited for the 20s' relative success among type 1s.

 

I might make a proper attempt at this if a RailRoad 08 body also fits. Given how early the loco would have been introduced, I believe that it would have worn a black livery in its early years, so it would be relatively easy to repaint. I also have a RR 08 in an awkward livery (DinoSafari) which I have been meaning to do something about for a while. This could allow a Hornby Thomas with a broken chassis to be partially de-Sudrianised and used dropped onto the very good chassis under the 08 for use on a future layout. Who knew 2 minutes of boredom could be so dangerous?

 

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

Edited April 12, 2021 by DK123GWR
Forgot to post the link

[PhilJ W]

4 hours ago, DK123GWR said:

Further to this post, I have found a locomotive with broadly similar dimensions (wheelbase around 30cm too long for the UE chassis, total length around 2m too long for the 08 body - although this includes external walkways). It was built by English Electric for 1067mm (3.5ft) gauge railways in New Zealand - the DE class. The body of the loco broadly resembles a class 20, but pre-dates it by 6 years (and is also a year older than the class 08)

 

Perhaps EE at the same time as developing the class 08 for BR and the DE class for NZR, EE decided to produce a locomotive to evaluate the suitability of diesel power for trip workings in the UK market. This used a very similar mechanism to the DE class (660hp diesel-electric with a top speed of 55mph) but was externally styled to resemble the shunters it was already producing for BR. The locomotive was found to be reliable in service, although often underpowered for its role. EE adressed this issue with the 1000hp class 20, the most powerful of the type 1s, and the experience gained from this prototype is often credited for the 20s' relative success among type 1s.

 

I might make a proper attempt at this if a RailRoad 08 body also fits. Given how early the loco would have been introduced, I believe that it would have worn a black livery in its early years, so it would be relatively easy to repaint. I also have a RR 08 in an awkward livery (DinoSafari) which I have been meaning to do something about for a while. This could allow a Hornby Thomas with a broken chassis to be partially de-Sudrianised and used dropped onto the very good chassis under the 08 for use on a future layout. Who knew 2 minutes of boredom could be so dangerous?

 

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

Even more like a class 20 were the three metre gauge 450hp 1-B-B-1 locomotives supplied to the Eastern Railway of Brazil in 1938.

[ScottishRailFanatic]

On 11/04/2021 at 16:41, MikeRich said:

First time poster, but I've been inspired by some of the amazing ideas on this thread, so here goes...

Welcome to the team! Prepare to dive down a nearly bottomless pit of alternative histories, design mysteries and 'what-if' paradoxes! 

 

Meanwhile, here's a Class 91 with six-wheel motor bogies - maybe it could really do 140 if the infrastructure allowed.

 

[Flying Pig]

On 13/04/2021 at 15:39, ScottishRailFanatic said:

Meanwhile, here's a Class 91 with six-wheel motor bogies - maybe it could really do 140 if the infrastructure allowed.

 

Well one of the real ones apparently reached nearly 162mph, so your version should theoretically get to 6/4 * 162 = 243mph. . Have you considered one with eight wheel bogies?

[BernardTPM]

Actually very few six-wheel bogies are suitable for high speeds.

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, BernardTPM said:

Actually very few six-wheel bogies are suitable for high speeds.

 

Why?

[Gibbo675]

9 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Why?

Hi Stephen,

 

In simple terms the pivoting around the centre axle increases the incidence of hunting, therefore a long wheelbase two axle bogie will have a greater stability at speed.

 

Gibbo.

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, Gibbo675 said:

In simple terms the pivoting around the centre axle increases the incidence of hunting, therefore a long wheelbase two axle bogie will have a greater stability at speed.

 

Interesting. Presumably this wasn't an issue at early 20th-century express speeds, or at least not recognised as an issue - a period when the heaviest carriages - especially dining carriages were stability would be particularly valued - were carried on 6-wheel bogies, primarily to keep the weight on individual journals down. But it's noteable that one of Churchward's innovations was to build 70 ft carriages with 4-wheel bogies, so maybe he was aware of a problem. (I'm not sure the Great Western ever had any 12-wheelers?)

[BernardTPM]

The Great Western did use 6 wheel bogies on some heavier coaches, mainly restaurant/kitchen coaches and some sleepers.

[Coach bogie]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Interesting. Presumably this wasn't an issue at early 20th-century express speeds, or at least not recognised as an issue - a period when the heaviest carriages - especially dining carriages were stability would be particularly valued - were carried on 6-wheel bogies, primarily to keep the weight on individual journals down. But it's noteable that one of Churchward's innovations was to build 70 ft carriages with 4-wheel bogies, so maybe he was aware of a problem. (I'm not sure the Great Western ever had any 12-wheelers?)

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Zomboid]

16 hours ago, Gibbo675 said:

Hi Stephen,

 

In simple terms the pivoting around the centre axle increases the incidence of hunting, therefore a long wheelbase two axle bogie will have a greater stability at speed.

 

Gibbo.

Presumably the not terribly common 4 axle bogie (such as the DD40AX) would be better at high speeds?

 

Not that high speeds were a feature, but where would the 1-Co bogies under peaks and 40s fall?

 

[The Johnster]

My experience of riding on class 45 and 46 locos as a Canton guard in the 70s was that the ride was firm, certainly, but very good on low mileage locos.  They did not wear well, though, and a high mileage loco would bottom the springs out and be a right bag of nails.  I can only assume that 40s were the same, and the original users of these very solid bogies, the Southern Region 10101/2/3 diesel electrics that were the forerunners of the 40s.

 

A well designed long wheelbase 4 wheel bogie such as we had on the Hymeks rode like a Pullman even at 90mph+ on the Peterborough Parcels, and the smooth ride no doubt assisted with the quiet, warm, and very comfortable cab.  But the worst ride I experienced in my career was to be found on their replacement locos on the Peterborough, class 25s, draughty noisy boneshakers that struggled to reach 90mph with 4 on, and the ride was so bad that nobody ever felt it necessary to push things.  By the time you got to Gloucester, you were exhausted, and your spine was probably 2 inches shorter.  Horrible things, complete waste of time, couldn't pull the skin off your milk, and nowhere near as good as a Hymek in any respect. 

 

Hymeks were better riders than Westerns, which boiunced around a good bit and developed  a violent shaking between 55 and 65mph, just the speed you wanted to run a fully fitted train of oil tanks at.  The only loco IMHO that came close to Hymek standards was the 31, which also had a superb cab, but was not much use when it came to hauling trains.  47s swayed, rolled, and pitched like a ship in a storm, but were warm and quiet enough.  37s were firm but good steady,riders, even at high mileage, but the cabs were very noisy.  Can't comment on 33s, as they arrived at Canton after I left, but drivers I spoke to seemed to like them.

 

I am aware of the poor riding of the original 25kv electrics, on fairly long wheelbase 4 wheel boges.  My experience at Canton suggests that the effectiveness of a bogie is more dependent on the design of the springing than the number of wheels, but that by and large the longer the wheelbase the better.  That said, the longest wheelbase bogie I was familiar with, the 1Co on the 45s and 46s, did not ride well if towards the end of it's service before overhaul.  It looked, and to my mind was, heavy, over-engineered with those massive plate frames, and crude.  Then again, the Commonwealth style 47 bogie, which looked the part, threw you all over the place at anything over about 30mph, but not too violently; your spine would feel it if it bottomed out, though.  There seem to be no hard and fast conclusions to be had in this, only generalisations and the necessity to mention the exceptions. 

[rodent279]

2 hours ago, The Johnster said:

My experience of riding on class 45 and 46 locos as a Canton guard in the 70s was that the ride was firm, certainly, but very good on low mileage locos.  They did not wear well, though, and a high mileage loco would bottom the springs out and be a right bag of nails.  I can only assume that 40s were the same, and the original users of these very solid bogies, the Southern Region 10101/2/3 diesel electrics that were the forerunners of the 40s.

 

A well designed long wheelbase 4 wheel bogie such as we had on the Hymeks rode like a Pullman even at 90mph+ on the Peterborough Parcels, and the smooth ride no doubt assisted with the quiet, warm, and very comfortable cab.  But the worst ride I experienced in my career was to be found on their replacement locos on the Peterborough, class 25s, draughty noisy boneshakers that struggled to reach 90mph with 4 on, and the ride was so bad that nobody ever felt it necessary to push things.  By the time you got to Gloucester, you were exhausted, and your spine was probably 2 inches shorter.  Horrible things, complete waste of time, couldn't pull the skin off your milk, and nowhere near as good as a Hymek in any respect. 

 

Hymeks were better riders than Westerns, which boiunced around a good bit and developed  a violent shaking between 55 and 65mph, just the speed you wanted to run a fully fitted train of oil tanks at.  The only loco IMHO that came close to Hymek standards was the 31, which also had a superb cab, but was not much use when it came to hauling trains.  47s swayed, rolled, and pitched like a ship in a storm, but were warm and quiet enough.  37s were firm but good steady,riders, even at high mileage, but the cabs were very noisy.  Can't comment on 33s, as they arrived at Canton after I left, but drivers I spoke to seemed to like them.

 

I am aware of the poor riding of the original 25kv electrics, on fairly long wheelbase 4 wheel boges.  My experience at Canton suggests that the effectiveness of a bogie is more dependent on the design of the springing than the number of wheels, but that by and large the longer the wheelbase the better.  That said, the longest wheelbase bogie I was familiar with, the 1Co on the 45s and 46s, did not ride well if towards the end of it's service before overhaul.  It looked, and to my mind was, heavy, over-engineered with those massive plate frames, and crude.  Then again, the Commonwealth style 47 bogie, which looked the part, threw you all over the place at anything over about 30mph, but not too violently; your spine would feel it if it bottomed out, though.  There seem to be no hard and fast conclusions to be had in this, only generalisations and the necessity to mention the exceptions. 

The Bulleid-Raworth bogie, in its 1-Co version, carried the buffers and draw gear, so therefore had to be built to withstand and transfer all the buffing, braking and traction forces between locomotive and train. That's why they were massive and over-engineered, compared to say a class 37 bogie. A similar arrangement, though different design, was used in the EM1 electrics, though the bogies were also physically linked together with a sturdy pin through an eye between the bogies. Whether this transferred all the traction forces, or was just to assist in steering the bogies through curves I don't know.

[The Johnster]

Yes, it was effectively an entire little outside framed 2-6-0 in it’s own right on that score, and one of the reasons it featured in that nuclear flask crash test. 

[jcm@gwr]

6 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Yes, it was effectively an entire little outside framed 2-6-0 in it’s own right on that score, and one of the reasons it featured in that nuclear flask crash test. 

 

I'd never considered the possibility of it being mounted on twin, miniature, Aberdares before!

[relaxinghobby]

 

A type popular overseas but never caught on on British railways a long boiler 2-4-0. Robert Stephenson built many long boiler types for the Continent and other British locomotive builders sold then too.

This is a model of a Sharp Stewart standard built for the Spanish railways. Seen here with a LSWR T9 maybe on the long branch line to Padstow down in far Cornwall. Maybe SS where trying to sell some as suitable for the long cross country line in the rolling hills of the West Country and it was undergoing trials. Also trying out the built up tender, a short type seen in Australia. After all British loco builders of the time sold across the globe.

The T9 seems to awaiting repair to it's clack valve.

As a model the 2-4-0 and it's tender are proper scale models to 4mm scale so it can be accurately compared to the slightly bigger T9. They are all built from bits and bobs, a Tri-ang cab, Lima and Airfix boiler bits, a metal chassis meant to motorise an Airfix Pug, etc, etc.

Such a loco when on a free loan from a British builder hopping to sale some un-bought stock and get it off the books could have lent it to a home railway, as a chance to flog off a loss. Such a little loco could have pottered around some branch line for a few months un-noticed by any railwayiac photographer of the day and escaping history.

 

Just distracting myself before a visit to the dentist.

[Zomboid]

10 hours ago, The Johnster said:

well designed long wheelbase 4 wheel bogie such as we had on the Hymeks rode like a Pullman even at 90mph+ on the Peterborough Parcels, and the smooth ride no doubt assisted with the quiet, warm, and very comfortable cab.  But the worst ride I experienced in my career was to be found on their replacement locos on the Peterborough, class 25s, draughty noisy boneshakers that struggled to reach 90mph with 4 on, and the ride was so bad that nobody ever felt it necessary to push things

Whilst they were on the same job, so a comparison isn't totally invalid, it is a bit of an apples and oranges thing to compare a 1700hp type 3 to a 1250hp type 2. Of course the hymek is going to be more capable.

 

Other criticisms of the 25 are of course valid.

[The Johnster]

Fair enough, but the 25s were sent to Canton as replacements for the Hymeks, which I reckoned was a bit daft at a time when there were lines of stored 37s at Margam, admittedly without heating boilers.   The WR seemed to be particularly averse to using 37s on passenger jobs until the late 80s, while the Eastern and Scottish had proved their suitability for this sort of work.  
 

The ‘meks were superb locos, the best of the hydraulics, good riders and good strong pullers as well. The sight of one lifting 900+ tons up the bank out of Aberthaw Cement Works showed off their pocket rocket capabilities; a hard act to fellow and one of the best power/weight ratios in the game.  They were out of a 25’s league in every way until it came to fitting train air brakes or ETH.  The other replacement for them on the WR was the 31, again not really powerful enough and much heavier, but better suited to fast work than the 25s.