Imaginary Locomotives

[Gibbo675]

2 hours ago, BernardTPM said:

It does make you wonder how they managed to make them the Class 40s that much heavier given how much the two classes have in common. The 40s would probably have been better without those plate frame bogies inherited from the Bullied/EE trio.

Hi Benard,

 

Considering that 10000/1 had the same power unit and ostensibly similar traction equipment as the class 40's it does seem strange that EECo. managed to build a locomotive 5.5 tons heavier ten years later.

 

Should that the bogies that were developed for Deltic have been used along with a shorter body and a reduction of the thickness of the body skin sheets the class 40's could have been quite different especially that DP2 came in at 105 tons again with the same basic power unit.

 

The only thing that stopped BR from uprating the power unit in the class 40's was that the bogies would have suffered cracks to an even greater extent than they did anyway.

 

Gibbo.

[PhilJ W]

3 hours ago, rodent279 said:

Then there's these:-

 

 

Rhodesian Railways DE2, Cape Gauge class 40 clones, though derated to 1700hp. First appeared in 1955, 20-ish tons lighter than a 40, slightly wider, but only by a few inches, though probably too wide at cantrail height. Some actually had overhauled ex-class 40 engines fitted in them in the 1980's.

Makes me wonder why BR didn't simply have a standard gauge version of these?

 

A lot like the Australian LDC type illustrated a couple of pages back. The LDC was tested on the British main line with standard gauge bogies.

[simon b]

So looking at the DE2 and other EE export loco's, why is it that the majority seem to have a pair of large cab windows whilst the domestic machines had 3 smaller ones? Something to do with the BR design panel?

[PhilJ W]

17 minutes ago, simon b said:

So looking at the DE2 and other EE export loco's, why is it that the majority seem to have a pair of large cab windows whilst the domestic machines had 3 smaller ones? Something to do with the BR design panel?

Could be a number of reasons such as easier replacement in case of damage. Replacement glass for a 37 must be easier to fit than that for a Deltic. 

[BernardTPM]

25 minutes ago, simon b said:

So looking at the DE2 and other EE export loco's, why is it that the majority seem to have a pair of large cab windows whilst the domestic machines had 3 smaller ones? Something to do with the BR design panel?

In the case of flat ended designs it was BR's requirement for through gangways* that led to using three windows on the cab ends. The other alternative with two was shown by NBL, using very arched front windows, though there the main cab parts (aluminium castings) were identical to the snub-nose on the original D600 Warships. EE did sometimes use three windows on their export designs so I doubt there was much Design Panel input there. The Cl.37s used the same cab tooling and jigs as the Cl.40. Cost effective, but it was basically against the Design Panel's wishes.

 

* hardly ever used, of course.

Edited May 7, 2021 by BernardTPM

[Flying Pig]

2 hours ago, BernardTPM said:

It does make you wonder how they managed to make them the Class 40s that much heavier given how much the two classes have in common. The 40s would probably have been better without those plate frame bogies inherited from the Bullied/EE trio.

 

Diagram of the DE2 here - see if you can spot the missing 20 tons.  

 

 

[rodent279]

8 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Diagram of the DE2 here - see if you can spot the missing 20 tons.  

 

 

The only thing that's obvious to me is the lack of train heating boiler, fuel and water tanks. That and the bogies, which on a class 40 are big heavy plate framed things, with buffers and drawgear attached, built to take buffing loads.

I suppose 3'6" bogies and axles, being narrower than standard gauge, would be lighter, but I can't see that accounting for 20 tons. 

[Clive Mortimore]

4 minutes ago, rodent279 said:

The only thing that's obvious to me is the lack of train heating boiler, fuel and water tanks. That and the bogies, which on a class 40 are big heavy plate framed things, with buffers and drawgear attached, built to take buffing loads.

I suppose 3'6" bogies and axles, being narrower than standard gauge, would be lighter, but I can't see that accounting for 20 tons. 

Plus another seven foot of main frame and body to bung the water 'otter in. Soon adds up.

 

I am sure I have used this photo before but EE did make co-Co with the uprated 16 cylinder engine using standard Newton le Willows jigs. I have a model of one so can prove it.

 

I am going to have to put a little bit of thought into a EMD loco which would fit our loading gauge, something on the lines of a BL2?

[John Besley]

7 hours ago, simon b said:

Looking at that pic, I think we've all overlooked the obvious answer.

 

 

Ok going back to my earlier comment on F7's if you took any BR diesel I.e. 37, 40, Peaks etc. And removed one cab, ran them in multiple even with a slave unit in between.... that was what I was thinking along the lines of... 

[AlfaZagato]

I'm still stuck on F-M power in the UK loading gauge.   Did anyone experiment with drop-center main frames?

[rodent279]

In fact, looking at 10000/10001, EE & the Derby design office did quite a good job on the styling. They wouldn't have looked too out of place on 1980's BR. They might even have looked ok in blue!

[BernardTPM]

Much of the cab shape around the windows is very like the 'Peaks' and their derivatives. Less rounded front to the nose is the most obvious difference in the later cab design, probably so the nose doors didn't cause that bump on the shape - then they got rid of them on the later builds anyway...

[Clive Mortimore]

52 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said:

I'm still stuck on F-M power in the UK loading gauge.   Did anyone experiment with drop-center main frames?

The F-M vertically apposed engines would have been to tall for the BR loading gauge. They were however adopted by the Soviets, because they had a higher loading gauge. Enjoy.

 

 

[rodent279]

1 hour ago, AlfaZagato said:

I'm still stuck on F-M power in the UK loading gauge.   Did anyone experiment with drop-center main frames?

F-M? Fairbanks-Morse?

[PhilJ W]

18 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

The F-M vertically apposed engines would have been to tall for the BR loading gauge. They were however adopted by the Soviets, because they had a higher loading gauge. Enjoy.

 

 

Plenty of clag.

[Cunningham Loco & Machine Works]

Yes, F-M is the abbreviation for Fairbanks Morse.

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

In fact, looking at 10000/10001, EE & the Derby design office did quite a good job on the styling. They wouldn't have looked too out of place on 1980's BR. They might even have looked ok in blue!

 

I'm sure there used to be an image of one in BR blue in the Fictitious Liveries collection, but that doesn't appear to be around anymore.  It didn't seem quite right to me as they have an archaic look that is part of their appeal.

 

Anyway, heres one with a two-part windscreen:

 

[Northmoor]

25 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

I'm sure there used to be an image of one in BR blue in the Fictitious Liveries collection, but that doesn't appear to be around anymore.  It didn't seem quite right to me as they have an archaic look that is part of their appeal.

 

Anyway, heres one with a two-part windscreen:

 

See how it would look with a 4-character headcode box......

[simon b]

7 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

I'm sure there used to be an image of one in BR blue in the Fictitious Liveries collection, but that doesn't appear to be around anymore.  It didn't seem quite right to me as they have an archaic look that is part of their appeal.

 

Anyway, heres one with a two-part windscreen:

 

 

That suits it a lot better I think, looks like it should of been designed that way. Now if it had a center headlight like DP1 instead of those doors it's almost the front of an EMD A unit.

[rodent279]

8 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

I'm sure there used to be an image of one in BR blue in the Fictitious Liveries collection, but that doesn't appear to be around anymore.  It didn't seem quite right to me as they have an archaic look that is part of their appeal.

 

Anyway, heres one with a two-part windscreen:

 

I very nearly didn't notice the two cab windows, they sit rather well. I don't think they really look any more archaic than a 37/40.

BR Large logo or Railfreight red stripe would probably look good on them-but then those liveries look good on almost anything!

Edited May 8, 2021 by rodent279

[rodent279]

Going back to why the class 40 was so large and heavy compared to the Rhodesian DE2, it's interesting to speculate what went on there, as the Bulleid-Raworth bogie is not an EE design, and the cab & body style is quite different to the LMS twins.

This leads me to speculate that what was built was not what EE would have produced, given free reign. BR presumably specified the Bulleid-Raworth bogies, and the bodyshell, but would EE have used a bogie derived from Deltic, with an extra carrying axle? Would it be possible to make the loco shorter, removing the need to mount the buffers and drawgear on the bogies? Would the cab have two front windows instead of 3?

Edited May 8, 2021 by rodent279

[Grizz]

8 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

I'm sure there used to be an image of one in BR blue in the Fictitious Liveries collection, but that doesn't appear to be around anymore.  It didn't seem quite right to me as they have an archaic look that is part of their appeal.

 

Anyway, heres one with a two-part windscreen:

 

Nice job. It really improves its appearance. Just tried an experiment by placing a piece of paper over the buffing and draw gear. This really starts to make it look a bit more like an E9 loco. The biggest thing then is the front doors and lack of Mars light.

 

[BernardTPM]

One unusual feature of the Class 40 is a water scoop for use with the old steam water troughs so that the steam heating boiler could be replenished on the move. There are photos of them in use, but it was another feature that probably added weight. Then again was it to save carrying the extra water around? - discuss.

I suspect the lower nose and three window arrangement was EE's own, possibly as a result of experience with the prototype Deltic where the export style squarer nose and two window arragement gave very squat windows because of the roof curvature. By rounding the nose more the windows could be deeper. Each outer window only needed one windscreen wiper instead of two (and the middle window was just there to let light in), possibly a factor too. A different 3 window design was used for New Zealand.

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, simon b said:

Now if it had a center headlight like DP1 instead of those doors

 

Connecting doors were clearly still seen as necessary several years later when the Pilot Scheme locos were being specified.  I think the need to attend heating boilers was a major driver of that and steam heating is a whole other can of worms.

 

1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

I very nearly didn't notice the two cab windows, they sit rather well. I don't think they really look any more archaic than a 37/40.

 

It's the overall design rather than a single feature like the number of panes in the windscreen that looks ancient to me, though the fairly deep flat panel above the windscreen doesn't help as the locos tend to frown like Ug the Caveman.  I didn't change that as it was probably fixed by other features of the design and construction.

 

1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

This leads me to speculate that what was built was not what EE would have produced, given free reign.

 

Looking at contemporary EE designs like Deltic, as well as the DE2 and New Zealand Railways Df2 I think you're almost certainly right.  Whether they could have got a 16SVT-powered type 4 on a CoCo chassis using Deltic bogies within the axle load limits at that time, I don't know but the DE2's 1CoCo1 arrangement is clearly more sophisticated than what BR was using.

[BernardTPM]

And now, in colour.

Including early Rail Blue, because why not?

 

 

 

 

Edited April 21, 2022 by BernardTPM