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.

28XX

Imaginary Locomotives

Recommended Posts

Well, I'm not going to argue that Churchward was wrong to abandon the big boiler Atbara, that's for sure. 

My understanding is the LNER considered belpaire boxes too expensive to build and maintain, so it wasn't just loading gauge considerations. 

 

As for the Bear, that I think was one of Churchward's rare errors of judgement. I believe Churchward vetoed a combustion chamber because they'd been so troublesome on the Krugers, but with the benefit of hindsight I reckon he should have resolved the problems rather than end up with a boiler that was surely  too long in the tubes and too short of heating area in the firebox. The result AIUI was that even with the very large heating area in the superheater the steam chest temperature was too low - a good bit less than the Stars I believe.

Of course the other advantage the GWR had was that they didn't need to get a single locomotive all the way to Scotland without clogging up the grate.

Edited by JimC
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/10/2019 at 17:33, melmerby said:

AAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!  My eyes, my beautiful eyes...

 

The leading drivers' splasher is in the wrong place.

 

4 hours ago, JimC said:

Well, I'm not going to argue that Churchward was wrong to abandon the big boiler Atbara, that's for sure. 

My understanding is the LNER considered belpaire boxes too expensive to build and maintain, so it wasn't just loading gauge considerations. 

 

As for the Bear, that I think was one of Churchward's rare errors of judgement. I believe Churchward vetoed a combustion chamber because they'd been so troublesome on the Krugers, but with the benefit of hindsight I reckon he should have resolved the problems rather than end up with a boiler that was surely  too long in the tubes and too short of heating area in the firebox. The result AIUI was that even with the very large heating area in the superheater the steam chest temperature was too low - a good bit less than the Stars I believe.

Of course the other advantage the GWR had was that they didn't need to get a single locomotive all the way to Scotland without clogging up the grate.

At the time the Great Bear was built, neither did anyone else... ECML trains changed locos at York and Newcastle, and WCML at Crewe and Carlisle.  The Midland/GSW alternative changed at Leeds and Carlisle.  The longest non stop run on the GW in those days was probably Paddington-Newport until the Berks & Hants cutoffs were completed.  Great Bear seldom made it past Bristol.  You might argue that the LMS corrected Great Bear's issues with the Princess Royal class, which could (and regularly did) go all the way to Scotland non stop (ok, a pause at Upperby) without clogging up the grate.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

AAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!  My eyes, my beautiful eyes...

 

The leading drivers' splasher is in the wrong place.

 

 

Yes it is hideous.

 

Isn't that a fairing over the reversing linkage?

Edited by melmerby
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/10/2019 at 12:24, JimC said:

Churchward, at the instigation of one of his deputies, trialled one of the Atbara Class with a large round top firebox boiler and a large cab. Apparently the crews hated the big  cab, and it was taken off in short order, and the large boiler wasn't a success either and was replaced a couple of years later. But what if it had been a success? Here's a Churchward County 4-4-0 boiler with the big boiler and side window cab, and I've matched it with a much larger 4,000 gallon Hawksworth tender, as the original 3,500 gallon tender looked out of proportion to me.

Isn't that a LNER D49 in GWR livery?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Isn't that a LNER D49 in GWR livery?

...Good point, it does look like a D49.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
On 18/10/2019 at 21:41, 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.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_10/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.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_10/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.

 

 


IMGP0126a.JPG.6000ee59a68c8dce640b2e30a3e9f354.JPG,

Everyones a loco designer! So to answer these critiques I've sent the Bulleid/Schools 4-6-0 back to the works for some minor modifications.
Back in 1963 when the Schools class was being scraped ( Wiki ) there could have been a few spare Schools boilers available in good condition.
For the Johnster and Ramblin Rich,  there is now a Bulleid West Country Cab so to can match the tender better
Did anyone notice I had forgotten to re-attached the smoke deflectors because the footplate and buffers where moved forward by 9 " or 3mm in scale terms the deflectors needed to be moved forward as well.


The curves of the footplate have been removed so it looks more modern and utilitarian
The large headlight will be useful for crossing Dartmoor and the wastes of Bodinmoor after nightfall. A new steam turbo-dynamo must be mounted on the other side.
A 4-6-0 with the same boiler as a 4-4-0 must have a smaller axle loading?
For axle loading back to Wiki,  the weight on a Schools coupled axle and wheels is given as 21ton plus 21t. If the same wight is spread over 3 axles it would be 14t + 14t +14t

so a much lighter load and if these are 2 cylinder locos the front ends would be lighter than the Schools 13t + 13t bogie weight.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, relaxinghobby said:

 


https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_10/IMGP0126a.JPG.6000ee59a68c8dce640b2e30a3e9f354.JPG,

Everyones a loco designer! So to answer these critiques I've sent the Bulleid/Schools 4-6-0 back to the works for some minor modifications.
Back in 1963 when the Schools class was being scraped ( Wiki ) there could have been a few spare Schools boilers available in good condition.
For the Johnster and Ramblin Rich,  there is now a Bulleid West Country Cab so to can match the tender better
Did anyone notice I had forgotten to re-attached the smoke deflectors because the footplate and buffers where moved forward by 9 " or 3mm in scale terms the deflectors needed to be moved forward as well.


The curves of the footplate have been removed so it looks more modern and utilitarian
The large headlight will be useful for crossing Dartmoor and the wastes of Bodinmoor after nightfall. A new steam turbo-dynamo must be mounted on the other side.
A 4-6-0 with the same boiler as a 4-4-0 must have a smaller axle loading?
For axle loading back to Wiki,  the weight on a Schools coupled axle and wheels is given as 21ton plus 21t. If the same wight is spread over 3 axles it would be 14t + 14t +14t

so a much lighter load and if these are 2 cylinder locos the front ends would be lighter than the Schools 13t + 13t bogie weight.

You also need to change the positioning of the splashers and add an extra one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/10/2019 at 20:48, Northmoor said:

Isn't that a LNER D49 in GWR livery?

 

Which says something quite interesting about locomotive policies don't you think? 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, runs as required said:

So did Holden's GE Stratford cab originate on a Swindon drawing board?

Not really, AIUI Wright was very influenced by locos that were already in existence in the North eastern quarter of the country.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love some of the absurdities that occasionally crop up in larger scales.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said:

I love some of the absurdities that occasionally crop up in larger scales.

Indeed. Nice to see that streak of crazy inventiveness doesn't just run in the smaller scale freelancers like me.

Can't really see any feasible use for an engine like that on a railway though, except maybe moving continents...

Edited by RedGemAlchemist
  • Like 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedGemAlchemist said:

Speaking of beasts, here's a 4-10-2 monster I found on YouTube:

 

That isn't imaginary, that is real and lovely.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

That isn't imaginary, that is real and lovely.

Basically it's what a Class 9 Standard Tank might look like.

Actually there's a thought...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AlfaZagato said:

I love some of the absurdities that occasionally crop up in larger scales.

It's the commitment and expense. We might think of something daft, maybe even chop up some Dapol kits, or once in a while bash a secondhand loco, but someone has had an absurdly (but brilliantly) daft idea and spent several years, no little skill and a few grand pulling it off. Impressive.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RedGemAlchemist said:

Indeed. Nice to see that streak of crazy inventiveness doesn't just run in the smaller scale freelancers like me.

Can't really see any feasible use for an engine like that on a railway though, except maybe moving continents...

With such a large contraption in the 12"/ft world the bunker and tanks would soon be empty.

Probably have a range of about 50 miles:mellow:

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RedGemAlchemist said:

Speaking of beasts, here's a 4-10-2 monster I found on YouTube:

 

 

 

https://youtu.be/Qyocu-FICQE

 

You may also enjoy this freelance Pacific, it’s just me, but I’ve always thought that had the railway’s been nationalised in 1919, any Pacifics they came up with would look much the same.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or the S Wales iron ore traffic...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, melmerby said:

With such a large contraption in the 12"/ft world the bunker and tanks would soon be empty.

Probably have a range of about 50 mileshttps://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/emoticons/default_mellow.png



A 10-coupled tank locomotive would probably be better off as a 2-10-4T to carry a usefully-sized bunker and tanks. Having said that, something like two-thirds of all the 4-10-2s ever built were tank locomotives in South Africa:

640px-CSAR_Class_E_4-10-2T.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/09/2019 at 22:50, brack said:

Bizarrely described as a luggage steam railcar (that's what is on the back end). Theres still one around:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cc/BB%C3%96_DT1-07_Orth_an_der_Donau_19931030.jpg/1280px-BB%C3%96_DT1-07_Orth_an_der_Donau_19931030.jpg

 

The Nord part of the Ceinture had a similar contraption which even had a dog compartment.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.