Imaginary Locomotives

[AlfaZagato]

A thought I just had.

 

I'm surprised the Mikado (2-8-2) arrangement never gained traction in the UK.   On a shallow level of understanding, the UK's operating situation is remarkably similar to Japan's.   Japan ended up almost exclusively using Mikados after the first were delivered from the US.

 

I know Gresley had his P1 & P2, & there was the GWR tank.   Still, the 2-8-2 saw some good service elsewhere as a passenger loco.

 

I couldn't see the GWR ever committing to any number of Mikados - too entrenched in their ways.   Would Stanier or Riddles have attempted the type?   Or maybe Bulleid?

[Flying Pig]

2 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said:

A thought I just had.

 

I'm surprised the Mikado (2-8-2) arrangement never gained traction in the UK. 

 

 

You and a few others A search for 2-8-2 within this topic returns quite a number of results and the Riddles 2-8-2 is a perennial favourite.  Several fine models of the latter have appeared on RMweb.

[AlfaZagato]

We're only a few hundred pages in.   I'm not surprised it's come up before.

 

 

I've probably brought it up before.

[JimC]

1 hour ago, AlfaZagato said:

I'm surprised the Mikado (2-8-2) arrangement never gained traction in the UK. 

Maye not the question to ask in the imaginary locomotives topic, but what was the operational need a passenger 2-8-2 could fulfil? Were the Class 8 passenger locomotives short of adhesion for many of their duties? What does a 2-8-2 bring to the table over a Pacific for UK duties? I suggest more adhesive weight, similar size boiler and cylinders, and more expense. The UK loading gauge prohibits a larger boiler unless it goes longer, and I submit that longer barrels had not gone well in the UK.

[simon b]

3 hours ago, JimC said:

Maye not the question to ask in the imaginary locomotives topic, but what was the operational need a passenger 2-8-2 could fulfil? Were the Class 8 passenger locomotives short of adhesion for many of their duties? What does a 2-8-2 bring to the table over a Pacific for UK duties? I suggest more adhesive weight, similar size boiler and cylinders, and more expense. The UK loading gauge prohibits a larger boiler unless it goes longer, and I submit that longer barrels had not gone well in the UK.

I thought the reason for building the P2 was better traction and more power?  

[Zomboid]

4 hours ago, AlfaZagato said:

couldn't see the GWR ever committing to any number of Mikados - too entrenched in their ways.   Would Stanier or Riddles have attempted the type?   Or maybe Bulleid?

I think the merchant navy class concept started as a 4-8-2 (that would have been something), and then became a 2-8-2 before finally ending up as the 4-6-2 that was built.

 

In another universe where freight handling got beyond about 1860s practice before the 1960s, there might have been some use for a big 2-8-2 on fast freights etc, and they could have done good work on heavy passenger trains (if there were any...) on the Highland main line and routes like that.

[The Johnster]

Fast freight and heavy medium speed passenger work comes to mind with Mikados.  The trailing truck allows a wide Atlantic/Pacific type firebox, but the single axle pony is not quite adequate for good riding at express speeds.  It can be tolerated for short periods, as in the 9F exploits on the 'Red Dragon' and the ECML ('you were supposed to make time, not break the bl**dy sound barrier!), but officialdom rightly stepped in to protect the per way and stop the locos shaking themselves to pieces.  By the 60s, the sort of 60mph heavy freight trains that might have provided work for Mikados were becoming more common, but Britannia light pacifics and 9Fs handled them admirably until the diesels took over.

 

The P2s were designed for a high tractive effort rather than all out top speed, and TTBOMK their work did not require much more than about 70mph, but with heavy trains over a difficult route.  This segues into another possible role for a 2-8-2, the very heavy overnight parcels and mail trains.  Reliable running was vital for the Royal Mail's services, as there were heavy penalty clauses in the contract for delays caused by either party.

[Ben Alder]

The BR 2-8-2 is an itch I've tried to scratch several times, without ever getting it done, but here is the latest attempt, based on a Clan and P2 chassis with Br Standard Four drivers. Its been running successfully, but I haven't sorted out the valve gear yet. It's going to get Brit cylinders but haven't managed to find a driving rod long enough to drive on the third set of wheels - any suggestions gratefully received.....I have another P2 and Clan body in the stash with thoughts of either 5' or 5'3" drivers once I get this one done.

 

[LNWR18901910]

45 minutes ago, Ben Alder said:

The BR 2-8-2 is an itch I've tried to scratch several times, without ever getting it done, but here is the latest attempt, based on a Clan and P2 chassis with Br Standard Four drivers. Its been running successfully, but I haven't sorted out the valve gear yet. It's going to get Brit cylinders but haven't managed to find a driving rod long enough to drive on the third set of wheels - any suggestions gratefully received.....I have another P2 and Clan body in the stash with thoughts of either 5' or 5'3" drivers once I get this one done.

 

What an outstanding and fantastic model! Is its purpose mixed-traffic, express passenger or heavy freight?

[Ben Alder]

Thanks - I'll leave the experts to thrash out TE adhesion, speed etc of such a prototype - I'll be using it as an MT loco, basically as I liked the lined black livery - it started out planned as a plain black one but I succumbed...

 

[rockershovel]

Gresley's 8-coupled engines demonstrated clearly that the overall structure of the railway network, couldn't handle locos of that size and capacity. They didn't succeed because their real purpose wasn't catered for.

Edited June 8, 2021 by rockershovel

[rockershovel]

Japan is rather different to the UK in that most of its heavy industry and population, live in the coastal regions. So coastal and export sea freight is big business there, whereas the railways pretty much killed off coastal shipping in UK. Also they made much use of Cape Gauge (3'6") so locos capable of good  but not spectacular speeds, and good TE were very successful, and the Mikado type provided that. 

[rodent279]

7 hours ago, Ben Alder said:

The BR 2-8-2 is an itch I've tried to scratch several times, without ever getting it done, but here is the latest attempt, based on a Clan and P2 chassis with Br Standard Four drivers. Its been running successfully, but I haven't sorted out the valve gear yet. It's going to get Brit cylinders but haven't managed to find a driving rod long enough to drive on the third set of wheels - any suggestions gratefully received.....I have another P2 and Clan body in the stash with thoughts of either 5' or 5'3" drivers once I get this one done.

 

Caprotti gear would sort the valve gear issue out. Maybe also mount the cylinders slightly further towards the locomotive center-two large outside cylinders might cause a lively ride at speed!

[PhilJ W]

2 hours ago, rockershovel said:

Gresley's 8-coupled engines demonstrated clearly that the overall structure of the railway network, couldn't handle locos of that size and capacity. They didn't succeed because their real purpose wasn't catered for.

The P1's were too powerful for the task for which they were built. The P2's were not used where they could have been useful. During WW2 they would have been ideal if moved south to handle the heavier wartime trains instead of rebuilding them into rather mediocre pacifics.

[JimC]

2 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

The P2's were not used where they could have been useful. During WW2 they would have been ideal if moved

Well, either LNER management were fools, or they had considerations you are unaware of. Which do you think more likely? 

[Compound2632]

18 hours ago, The Johnster said:

I think the large boilered GN Atlantics were pretty much at their peak anyway as built, and the onset of the Pacifics relegated them to secondary and pilot duties where more performance was not really needed. 

 

"Gresley had no delusions about the shortcomings of his first Pacifics, in comparison with the performance of the Ivatt large-boilered Atlantics which he had so brilliantly modernised."

 

O.S. Nock, Speed Record on Britain's Railways (David & Charles, 1971)

 

My emphasis in both quotations.

 

The large-boilered Atlantics were by no means all displaced from the most prestigious trains - they worked the London-Leeds Pullmans until 1937

[The Johnster]

While the Yorkshire Pullman was certainly a prestige service in passenger perception terms, it was relatively lightly loaded and easily timed, effectively a secondary service in operational terms and ideal work for the C1s, which could run fast and steam freely if not overloaded and the use of which released A1 and A3, for that matter A4, pacifics for work on heavier trains.  The C1s were also being utilised on outer suburban work at this time.

 

Their cousins, the Marsh atlantics on the Southern, were the normal horse for the Brighton Belle until it was electrified, and this was I would suggest probably a tougher job to a 60mph average timing which had been important to the marketing people since LBSC days, albeit over a shorter route.  They were presumably good for the job, as I am unaware of their ever having been replaced by Arthurs or Nelsons, which were used on the Western and Eastern Sections for Pullman work and other expresses or boat train,

[rockershovel]

4 hours ago, JimC said:

Well, either LNER management were fools, or they had considerations you are unaware of. Which do you think more likely? 

I've long believed that the LNER 2-8-2 types were too powerful for their English freight roles, and too long in the driven wheelbase for the Scottish expresses, because that was intrinsic in a design of that type. The LNER determined to build them, when other companies were settled on 2-8-0 and 4-6-2 types  and the results are a matter of record. This sort of thing happens sometimes, its how operational boundaries are defined 

[Ben Alder]

The 2-8-2  is part of a batch build of putative Standards that I have spent years on and off getting not very far with, but I have more or less cleared the ever busy workbench to get it out of my system. Some are probably more viable than others but here are two of the same class - a small wheeled variation of the Clan; the proposed Class 5 Pacific? One is a repaint of my JE kit for the Clan that became surplus to requirement with Hornby's release and the other was a bonus - two seperate ebay gatherings of a chassis and body at snatch up prices. These pics are cruel looks at something in late progress and not a flattering angle, I'm afraid.....the difference a deflector makes to the overall look. I swithered over adding one or not and when the unexpected appearance of another option arrived I decided on one of each.

 

[rodent279]

I guess a class 5 Pacific would have taken up the 74xxx number series-I don't think that was ever used?

[Ben Alder]

4 hours ago, rodent279 said:

I guess a class 5 Pacific would have taken up the 74xxx number series-I don't think that was ever used?

That series has already been taken up........

[AlfaZagato]

I suppose numbering series would depend on how you pose such a loco came about.   You say you used the 28XX boiler?   There was a Collet update of the 28XX, classed as 2884.   The last 2884 was numbered 3866.    If you call this a development of that series, maybe 3867 series?

[JimC]

It depends on your date. The 48s were moved to 14xx in 1946 to clear 48 for the oil burning 2-8-0s. If your locomotive post dates the end of the oil burning experiment then 4800 would be suitable. There was a plan to move the 5800 042s to 34xx numbers at one stage, so 58xx would be feasible, and with any luck you could buy 58xx plates. There was a proposed renumbering that only partially happened which involved moving 47xx and RODs to 88 and 98 respectively, but if you ignore that 88 would be a good series for a big tender engine, but you'll struggle to get etched plates.

[Mike 84C]

Richard, regarding the connecting rods on 70548, I think you have them in the correct place driving the second axle. Long rods and speed would set up high reciprocating stresses with probable flexing. A rough ride is almost certain. But it does look very good and believeable.

Not so sure about the 2-6-2 though could be a bit of a slippery machine!

[Ben Alder]

9 hours ago, 313201 said:

Can I ask please what parts you need to create those locos and what you did in order to create them

 

 The bodies of the 2-6-2's are Standard Fives and the chassis are Bachmann - what they are I've lost track of as I swapped bodies and chassis around during the ,extended in some cases, build, but there is a Class three tank and 76xxx body lying about so probably those. This all has evolved from a long time gathering of waifs and strays and I found enough bits for another couple of locos that were a bonus in a way. I started the high footplate one first but though it looked so ill proportioned with the small drivers that I did another, using the Bachmann Five boiler and a GBL Black Five footplate to see what it turned out like and gave it a smaller tender, resulting in a very different outline to the two.