Imaginary Locomotives

[Gibbo675]

4 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi Gibbo

 

Many years ago someone on a D&E modelling Yahoo group (remember them?) asked why steam locos never had yellow warning panels.

 

My answer was  "Chuff, Chuff, Chuff, Chuff, Chuff, Chuff......."

Hi Clive,

 

There are modellers that know about model railways and there are modellers that have actual experience of real railways. There is quite a disparity in the appreciation of what actually goes on especially within the environs of sheds and works.

Even preserved steam is nothing like the former pre-1968 real steam railway in the way it is operated and maintained. Bye way of comparison preserved steam is somewhat cossetted.

 

Gibbo.

[Gibbo675]

4 minutes ago, jf2682 said:

Hi Gibbo,

 

This was an eccentric request!  I meant the whole locomotive, similar to the all-yellow HST used by network rail(?), and the awful, in my opinion, purple Deltic.  Just a request to see what unusual colours do for a loco.

JF2682

 

18 hours ago, jf2682 said:

I would like to see warning panel yellow applied to a few steam locos to see how they would look: Duchess and A4s come to mind!!

 

JF2682

Hi jf2682,

 

To be fair I answered your first post most succinctly, it clearly states "warning panel yellow applied".

 

How am I to know whether or not you meant that the warning panel yellow is to be applied only as a warning panel or as an all over livery ?

 

Your grammar is indistinct for your supposition does not suggest either bye way of context, however the use of the words warning panel preceding the word yellow does suggest that it is more likely that it is just as a warning panel rather than as an all over livery as I understand the rules of grammar.

 

Does the above fully explain the context to my answer given ?

 

Gibbo.

[Corbs]

Yellow locos? 

[Gibbo675]

3 minutes ago, Corbs said:

Yellow locos? 

But Corbs !!!!

 

They all have black smoke boxes...... and red buffer beams..........and black footplating...........I'm going now.

 

Gibbo.

[rockershovel]

3 hours ago, RLBH said:

I think the logic of the V4 wasn't so much getting extra power, as getting extra ashpan capacity to keep going with poorer-quality coal and more air to help with combustion/draughting. It doesn't seem to have been a bad locomotive, just one that missed out when Thompson replaced Gresley. That suggests that there might be some sense in doing one as a BR Standard.

 

Sometimes, not offering a clear advantage over the existing designs is enough ...

 

[AlfaZagato]

I had forgotten how adorable your Ertl job was.

[brack]

Re the LNER V4, there was nothing wrong with them as such, they were well regarded, but the problem was that gresley died and Thompson put together the B1 out of reasonably standard parts that was easier to build and maintain, then produced tons of them.

[runs as required]

i remember reading that a sage in Stratford works maintained that the most efficient steam loco on the GE would be the one with a yellow painted funnel.

All the loco men would wonder what it was marked out for being watched for -  so they'd all handle it with kid gloves.

dh

[rockershovel]

9 hours ago, brack said:

Re the LNER V4, there was nothing wrong with them as such, they were well regarded, but the problem was that gresley died and Thompson put together the B1 out of reasonably standard parts that was easier to build and maintain, then produced tons of them.

 

Thats my point. By the time the V4 appeared, the 2-cylinder mixed-traffic 4-6-0 was an established type, well adapted to its duties, well known and understood; cost-effective to build and use. The V4 was swimming against a tide that would eventually lead to the “Black 5”.

[landscapes]

17 hours ago, Corbs said:

Yellow locos? 

Great modelling and very realistic photos, especially the pannier tank with added smoke.

[RedGemAlchemist]

17 hours ago, Corbs said:

Yellow locos? 

Duck had a makeover?

[Zomboid]

4 hours ago, rockershovel said:

 

Thats my point. By the time the V4 appeared, the 2-cylinder mixed-traffic 4-6-0 was an established type, well adapted to its duties, well known and understood; cost-effective to build and use. The V4 was swimming against a tide that would eventually lead to the “Black 5”.

Though had Gresley lived a couple more years he could well have had a large number of V4s built. Which would clearly have changed the rest of the landscape at nationalisation such that a wide firebox 2 cylinder 2-6-2 might have been built as the standard class 5 instead.

[melmerby]

9 hours ago, rockershovel said:

 

Thats my point. By the time the V4 appeared, the 2-cylinder mixed-traffic 4-6-0 was an established type, well adapted to its duties, well known and understood; cost-effective to build and use. The V4 was swimming against a tide that would eventually lead to the “Black 5”.

The LMS class 5 preceded the V4 by 7 years, by which time several hundred were going about their work, as well as it's progenitor the GWR Hall, also in substantial numbers.

 

4 hours ago, Zomboid said:

Though had Gresley lived a couple more years he could well have had a large number of V4s built. Which would clearly have changed the rest of the landscape at nationalisation such that a wide firebox 2 cylinder 2-6-2 might have been built as the standard class 5 instead.

IMHO I don't think it had a chance against the 2 cyl 4-6-0 which was aready around in several hundreds doing the same work in a simpler form.

No one else but Gresley seemed to want a 3 cyl 2-6-2.

[Gibbo675]

Hi Folks,

 

Irrespective of how good or not the V4 was or wasn't, it was a rather expensive to build and maintain Rolls Royce of an engine to do the work of an Austin Seven (the car not the Fowler 0-8-0).

 

The railways were and still are extremely careful when it comes to spending any amount of money at all unless it is upon express passenger trains.

 

Gibbo.

[The Johnster]

51 minutes ago, melmerby said:

The LMS class 5 preceded the V4 by 7 years, by which time several hundred were going about their work, as well as it's progenitor the GWR Hall, also in substantial numbers.

 

IMHO I don't think it had a chance against the 2 cyl 4-6-0 which was aready around in several hundreds doing the same work in a simpler form.

No one else but Gresley seemed to want a 3 cyl 2-6-2.

Have to agree with this; no matter how attractive the V4 concept is to enthusiasts, or how arguably superior it’s performance on the road, a 2 cylinder 4-6-0, sharing common parts with a heavy freight 2-8-0, and despite the restrictions of it’s narrow firebox, is a better bet overall from the cost effectiveness viewpoint, the bottom line.  

 

A 3 cylinder prairie is almost the antithesis of the post war design philosophy of 2 cylinder loco that were easy to build, maintain, and prepare for service/dispose. 

[rockershovel]

1 minute ago, The Johnster said:

Have to agree with this; no matter how attractive the V4 concept is to enthusiasts, or how arguably superior it’s performance on the road, a 2 cylinder 4-6-0, sharing common parts with a heavy freight 2-8-0, and despite the restrictions of it’s narrow firebox, is a better bet overall from the cost effectiveness viewpoint, the bottom line.  

 

A 3 cylinder prairie is almost the antithesis of the post war design philosophy of 2 cylinder loco that were easy to build, maintain, and prepare for service/dispose. 

 

Exactly. Look at the various criteria - outside valve gear for access, 2 cylinders for simplicity, high cylinders for clearance and maximum diameter (= minimum piston speed). The 4-6-0 and 2-10-0 designs showed that this would provide sufficient power and speed for anything but express passenger, and everyone knew about 4-6-2 types by then.

 

the V4 was a case of “Occams razor”

 

[melmerby]

IMHO Thompson's B1 provide the LNER with the ideal mixed traffic engine, using the same ideology as the Black 5 & Hall.

Standard set of parts, two cylinder with outside valve gear etc.

Whatever people think about his dealings with pacifics, Thompson's B1 is a classic UK mixed traffic loco. The right engine at the right time.

 

[Zomboid]

The advantage that a 2-6-2 would offer over a 4-6-0 is the ability to have a wide firebox over the trailing axle.

Any development of the type would have had that, and I don't see why a "Standard 5 2-6-2" would have needed 3 cylinders. 2 would do in the same fashion that the actual standard 5s got. Such a machine would have made an interesting comparison against the black 5s and so on.

[rockershovel]

4 hours ago, melmerby said:

IMHO Thompson's B1 provide the LNER with the ideal mixed traffic engine, using the same ideology as the Black 5 & Hall.

Standard set of parts, two cylinder with outside valve gear etc.

Whatever people think about his dealings with pacifics, Thompson's B1 is a classic UK mixed traffic loco. The right engine at the right time.

 

 

Handsome beasts, too. 

 

The only conclusion I can draw is that the wide firebox was not a sufficient advantage under U.K. conditions. 

 

 

[brack]

The V4 was reputedly much better riding than B17s and presumably B1s too. The rear carrying wheels ought to have helped that, as would the 3 smaller cylinders rather than 2 big ones (I know B17s are 3 cylinder machines too, presumably the difference lay in the trailing truck).

Having said that the B1 (and most 4-6-0s) were known to be good at getting trains started off as they transferred weight onto the rear drivers on starting, whereas I imagine the V4 would be more like a pacific and have a tendency to sit on the rear carrying wheels.

[rockershovel]

10 hours ago, brack said:

The V4 was reputedly much better riding than B17s and presumably B1s too. The rear carrying wheels ought to have helped that, as would the 3 smaller cylinders rather than 2 big ones (I know B17s are 3 cylinder machines too, presumably the difference lay in the trailing truck).

Having said that the B1 (and most 4-6-0s) were known to be good at getting trains started off as they transferred weight onto the rear drivers on starting, whereas I imagine the V4 would be more like a pacific and have a tendency to sit on the rear carrying wheels.

 

Which I assume, would be the reason that the 9F was a 2-10-0, not a 2-8-2. I’ve never heard anyone claim that a 9F was short of grate area, or lacked steaming ability; it seems (along with its German counterparts, also 2-10-0) to have been the epitome of last-generation steam traction. 

 

The MT 4-6-0 seems to have eclipsed the long-established 0-8-0 and 2-8-0 types, so there was definitely scope for genuinely better designs. 

 

The Gresley 2-8-2 showed that it was possible to construct freight locomotives that exceeded the network’s ability to utilise them. After that, what is there to achieve? The late American behemoths, the 2-8-2 and 2-8-4 types with mechanical stokers, cast steel frames, 40-ton axle loading etc had no useful role here. 

[RedGemAlchemist]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

The Gresley 2-8-2 showed that it was possible to construct freight locomotives that exceeded the network’s ability to utilise them. After that, what is there to achieve? The late American behemoths, the 2-8-2 and 2-8-4 types with mechanical stokers, cast steel frames, 40-ton axle loading etc had no useful role here. 

Not to mention the ten and twelve coupled beasts of Australia and Africa. 

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, RedGemAlchemist said:

Not to mention the ten and twelve coupled beasts of Australia and Africa. 

Comrade, you have forgotten those of the United Socialist Soviet Republics and the People's Republic China

[Niels]

14 hours ago, rockershovel said:

 

The only conclusion I can draw is that the wide firebox was not a sufficient advantage under U.K. conditions. 

 

 

 

Wide fireboxes are easier to repair for  broken or leaking stays.

That was the reason behind the german postWW2 designs.

A three squaremeter,wide firebox over five feet drivers and three cylinders could have given Royal Scotts a good run.

[rockershovel]

36 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Comrade, you have forgotten those of the United Socialist Soviet Republics and the People's Republic China

 

Dobroe, tovarisch! Spasiba bolshoye!  I’ve never seen a video of this semi-mythical beast, so here we are! http://cs.trains.com/ctr/f/3/t/272436.aspx