Imaginary Locomotives

[rockershovel]

HS2 seems to offer no benefit at all in terms of reducing existing commuter traffic into London, whilst offering the possibility of hugely increasing it. It doesn’t serve any of the export ports, Major or minor. 

[Northmoor]

1 minute ago, rockershovel said:

HS2 seems to offer no benefit at all in terms of reducing existing commuter traffic into London, whilst offering the possibility of hugely increasing it. It doesn’t serve any of the export ports, Major or minor. 

I strongly advise reading the HS2 thread on "Prototype Discussions"; there are professional railway people who articulate the justification behind it very well, often better than the HS2 team manage themselves.

 

Consider that if all the (non-stop) high speed services from North of Birmingham to Euston use HS2 instead of the South end of the WCML, how many paths that releases for semi-fast, stopping services and freight on the WCML.  Note that until the (likely temporary) recent drop in traffic, the prediction was that the last daytime path on the Southern end of the WCML, would have been taken by 2026.

[The Johnster]

HS2 isn't supposed to connect ports, it's a passenger railway.  The Southampton-Birmingham overhead electrification project does that.  HS2 should free up freight paths, some to ports, on the existing network.  Even HS1 doesn't connect ports, though it arguably supplements them...

[JimC]

On 26/10/2020 at 18:50, The Johnster said:

Oh dear, the worm’s are out of the can now! Of course the GW never attempted any speed records in the 30s, 

An interesting question is whether they had anywhere they could have set speed records. Wellington Bank had too many corners, was there anywhere that had straight track, a steep bank going down, plenty of room to stop and low enough traffic to deal with the disruption? I certainly doubt the Southern had a suitable location, while the risks taken for the LMS record are well documented. 

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, JimC said:

An interesting question is whether they had anywhere they could have set speed records. Wellington Bank had too many corners, was there anywhere that had straight track, a steep bank going down, plenty of room to stop and low enough traffic to deal with the disruption? I certainly doubt the Southern had a suitable location, while the risks taken for the LMS record are well documented. 

The Great Western has plenty of straight enough sections for high speeds, hence why it was able to operate at high averages (if not absolute peak speeds).  What's interesting is that rail speed records, based on a single peak speed, are set differently from the Land Speed Record where two runs in opposite directions have to be competed within 60 minutes.  This is to compensate for any beneficial effects of wind direction and speed.  I'd love to have seen what peak speed Mallard would have managed UP Stoke Bank......

[Compound2632]

There were no rules. I'm trying to think of a British maximum speed record that wasn't a spot speed achieved on a falling gradient 1:200 or steeper - which covers 117's 90 mph, 2632's 92 mph, 3440's 100 mph, 2750's 108 mph, 2515's 113 mph, 6220's 114 mph, and of course 4468's 125 mph. (Compare Wagner's 05 002 which maintained 125 mph over several miles on a more level line.) The only example I can think of is 1517's 90 mph obtained under test conditions but I've never found any account that gives the details.

[The Johnster]

The GW had plenty of 'racing stretches'; the Bristol route east of Swindon, the Badminton cut off, the Somerset Levels.  I agree Wellington is not the first place you'd think of if you were going for an out and out peak record, and I doubt if it was the intention to do so with City of Truro; the peak high speed was only for a quarter mile and incidental to the run as a whole  The 'brief' was to have a fast run and beat the LSW to your terminus, and was achieved with the aid of some very smart shunting at Pylle Hill and 'Duke of Connaught' putting in a very fast average speed run with 4 on.  Significantly, the company did not issue details of what happened on Wellington Bank and were somewhat irritated when the postal inspector released his timings to the press, followed by Rous Marten who saw no point in withholding his timings now that the cat was out of the bag. 

 

A cautions approach to this sort of publicity proved it's value a few weeks later when the LSW came badly unstuck at Salisbury Tunnel Jc, which put an end to the game. 

 

More significant was the somewhat mystereious escapade in  May1906 with 2903 Lady of Lyons on the Badminton cut off, proper racing country.  A practice had developed of giving new locomotives a 'snagging run' down the cut off to Stoke Gifford, turning them on one of the triangles, and, if no problems had been encountered on the way  down, turning up the wicks on the lubricators and giving the loco a fast run on the way back up to Swindon before handing it over  to traffic.   This had developed into a game with some very high speeds being recorded by the signalmen, who were timing the locos between boxes, especially on the downhill gradient from Badminton to Hullavington, 1 in 300.  This is rather coyly referenced by Wikipedia as a 'demonstration run by Charles Collett, then assistant manager of Swindon Works'. 

 

The real truth is somewhat embarrassing and reflected no glory on the participants, which is why it was hushed up at the time and not ever given any prominence in the companies dealings with the media.  Apparently, somebody fairly high up at Swindon whose identity has never been revealed had a £10 bet with one of his colleages, whose identity is also not revealed, that a brand new locomotive in perfect condition running light could easily achieve 100mph.  The next candidate was 2903, and with several interested parties aboard and the signalmen fully briefed, they set off from Stoke Gifford, were going fast at the summit at Badminton, and kept going down the bank.  The timing according to the signalmen at Little Somerford and Hullavington for the 4 and a half miles between them of 135 seconds equated to 120mph. 

 

There was some trouble in getting the loco to pull up for the home at Wootton Bassett, which the distant revealed to be on; luckily for everyone concerned this home was pulled off and road set for a clear run into the next section before the loco reached it a few seconds later.  It is probable that the 50mph speed restriction at the junction was not observed, and the loco was under control shortly afterwards.  Tuplin gives a somehwat purple account of this in 'Sinners and Saints', the best of which can be said being that it's a good read, involving back pressure vacuums in cylinders preventing the closing of the regulator and panic on the footplate until somebody thought of taking the loco out of gear (this would have acutally resulted in a rapid depostion of the boiler's contents around the locality, followed by the boiler if they didn't drop the fire pronto, like a lot of Tuplin's tales IT NEVER HAPPENED).  But it was a near miss, and no doubt there were a few raised pulses on the footplate.  On arrival at Swindon, there was probably a sheepish concensus that we shouldn't talk about this, and with the £10 handed over and loco crew paid to keep schtum, life was got on with.

 

Tuplin, again unable to contain his sense of the dramatic, claims that Churchward was furious when he heard that he'd nearly lost his entire staff to this foolish endeavour.  I am not sure that Churchward even knew about it until some time after; the secret was kept in Swindon Works, but rumours and stories seeped out from the signalmen, crew, and their chums.  For a long time there were all sorts of stories, that the loco had achieved 135mph in 120 seconds (clearly confusing the figures, that the loco was siezed on arrival at Swindon.  I first heard the story from a retired driver in a Vale of Glamorgan pub in about 1971; by this time the loco was the Dean Single from the earlier story, Duke of Connaught, and the location was the bottom of the Severn Tunnel...

 

The incident occurred sure enough, though, and the signalmen were in on the game so I think one can take their figures as pretty accurate.  A light engine travelling at such a pace is very difficult to stop with the brakes, and this is why light engines are limited to 75mph running, increasing in increments to 90mph with the number of coaches attached.  The problem is that only a light applincation of the steam brake can be made before the wheels lock up and the loco starts to slide, which will radically slow the rate at which it sheds speed.  The big point is that Collett was on the footplate, and it is my opinion that not only was he thoroughly ashamed of himself, as he should have been, he'd had a pretty bad fright!

 

I believe that this fright made him cautious regarding very high speeds, and coloured his attitude to the Stanier/Gresley competition in the 30s.  Stanier was probably aboard as well, but seems to have been less affected by the events than Collett, though he probably had something of an epiphany appoaching Crewe South at high speed in June 1937.  Certainly he seems not to have been keen for the LMS to try and recapture Mallard's record.  

 

It meant that the GWR was out of the game from that point as far as speed records were concerned, whatever the publicity department might have wanted.  They got plenty in later years; the centenary, the most powerful 4-6-0 in the world, the Cheltenham Flyer.  The company was proud of it's safety record and the development of the ATC system that enabled you to do 100mph in the fog!  But for the most part, timings were easy and progress pedestrian, often unaltered since Victorian times, and good though the locos and stock were, little progress that a regular passenger would have noticed was made.  At nationalisation, the railway had fallen behind the LNER and Southern when it came to passenger stock, still turning out coaches with conventional drawgear and poor crash performance.  There was cause to be grateful for the lax timings and ATC...

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

A cautions approach to this sort of publicity proved it's value a few weeks later when the LSW came badly unstuck at Salisbury Tunnel Jc, which put an end to the game. 

 

 

1 July 1906 - over two years later. But following the Race to the North of August 1895, the Preston smash on 13 July 1896 had already set public opinion against very high speeds. That's on reason why Charles Rous-Marten was very cagy about giving explicit details of the high speed runs he recorded, unless he had the permission of the railway company concerned. The travelling public was, as always, more interested in punctuality than rapidity.

[The Johnster]

And the press were, as always, more interested in selling copy than accurate reporting.

[Northmoor]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

1 July 1906 - over two years later. But following the Race to the North of August 1895, the Preston smash on 13 July 1896 had already set public opinion against very high speeds. That's on reason why Charles Rous-Marten was very cagy about giving explicit details of the high speed runs he recorded, unless he had the permission of the railway company concerned. The travelling public was, as always, more interested in punctuality than rapidity.

It is of course almost impossible now, with social media alive within minutes of a special run (with a certain band of enthusiasts desperate to be first with the "Gen"), to say nothing of OTMR making sure everything is recorded for posterity.  On the last run of the Anglia 86s, we exceeded the speed limit for significant periods and all through the train, people were reading it off on their GPSs.

On a positive note though, almost no-one is killed travelling by train in the UK these days!

Edited October 31, 2020 by Northmoor
typos

[rodent279]

On 26/10/2020 at 06:40, rockershovel said:

 

Definitely. Trains like the LNER Silver Jubilee or the Dreyfuss styling of the Twentieth Century Limited, or for that matter the original HST work because they are complete entities. 

 

This, on the other hand...

 

 

 

However, if they'd managed to make this ↑ look a bit more like this ↓ , maybe it would have been a bit more acceptable?

 

 

 

[cypherman]

Hi all,

Well again I have an engine that is free. Another one from my scrap box.

The back story for this engine is that it is 1942,The war is at it's worst and the railways are running on empty. The government have asked for ideas from the railway companies to try and increase engine numbers. This is what they came up with.

GWR released some spare hall chassis for use.

LMS sorted out the boilers, cabs and tender bodies and above frame items.

Southern provided some Tender wheels and frames.

LNER were unavailable for comment....... 

So this is what they built and survived into BR days. Thats my excuse anyway.

In reality it is  Hornby Hall chassis, Black 5 body, Schools class tender chassis and a Mainline Jubilee tender.

[The Johnster]

Looks perfectly cromulent to me, cypher; you could even have the boiler built at Swindon, where they were building Stanier 8Fs for the War Dept.  The inherited boiler toolings were used as Swindon to create a domeless 280psi boiler for the Hawksworth County, which is similar in 'principle' to this loco, which would have the edge over a Hall in terms of tractive effort, but might have suffered from the same cylinder surge problem as the Counties, which limited their use as mixed traffic locos.

[john new]

It could also be an inside Stephenson Link valve gear fitted Black 5 which they built to see how it compared for maintenance against the outside SL geared (4)4767.

[Flying Pig]

2 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Looks perfectly cromulent to me, cypher; you could even have the boiler built at Swindon, where they were building Stanier 8Fs for the War Dept.

 

It does actually make sense - say Swindon was asked build up some unfinished Hall chassis into a mixed traffic loco with wide route availability and used parts from the 8F to stay within the loading gauge. The tender underframe isn't a million miles from GW practise to this non-expert eye either.  

[cypherman]

Hi all,

I like all those options and it does give me some credibility for running it. Now to see what else I have lurking in my scrap boxes.....

I originally said the tender chassis was a Schools but it actually it is from  Hornby King as Flying Pig pointed out it looked more GWR. So the project was just an LMS/GWR operation which lends itself very much to The Johnsters and Flying Pigs ideas. But also possibly using John News Stephenson link valve gear. Poor Southern left out again. The Johnster I love the word  cromulent. If I can I will try and make up some name boards for this engine with that as it's name........ lol

Edited November 14, 2020 by cypherman

[LNWR18901910]

7 hours ago, cypherman said:

Hi all,

Well again I have an engine that is free. Another one from my scrap box.

The back story for this engine is that it is 1942,The war is at it's worst and the railways are running on empty. The government have asked for ideas from the railway companies to try and increase engine numbers. This is what they came up with.

GWR released some spare hall chassis for use.

LMS sorted out the boilers, cabs and tender bodies and above frame items.

Southern provided some Tender wheels and frames.

LNER were unavailable for comment....... 

So this is what they built and survived into BR days. Thats my excuse anyway.

In reality it is  Hornby Hall chassis, Black 5 body, Schools class tender chassis and a Mainline Jubilee tender.

Amazing work! It looks fantastic! I hope it runs well.

 

In fact, I'm working on a Pre-Grouping Steam-era interpretation of modern-day train companies and I was wondering if this would make a great steam locomotive! Would you be interested?

[cypherman]

11 minutes ago, LNWR18901910 said:

Amazing work! It looks fantastic! I hope it runs well.

 

In fact, I'm working on a Pre-Grouping Steam-era interpretation of modern-day train companies and I was wondering if this would make a great steam locomotive! Would you be interested?

Hi LNWR,

What would this entail. I may have a lot of time on my hands after Christmas as I have just been told that I am being made redundant in January. So except for what I have in stock at the moment my modelling will have to take a bit of a back burner as I look for another job. So time would not be a problem but money might. I have just bought a H/D castle body for a project and that is the last thing I can buy till I know what's happening.

As for running well it pulls 6 Triang Mk1 coaches with ease.

Edited November 14, 2020 by cypherman

[Sophia NSE]

My effort in this category is probably the most mundane; an R1 extended into an 0-6-2

 

[Clive Mortimore]

23 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

It does actually make sense - say Swindon was asked build up some unfinished Hall chassis into a mixed traffic loco with wide route availability and used parts from the 8F to stay within the loading gauge. The tender underframe isn't a million miles from GW practise to this non-expert eye either.  

They did and called it a County.

[The Johnster]

More or less, but the County was a 'red' route restricted loco, as was the Hall and BR 5MT, so a loco using an 8F boiler would have not had any particular advantage in terms of route availability even with a Hall chassis.  The GW designed the 4MT Manor for blue routes to improve on the (also 4MT) 43xx moguls.  The Manors, Hawksworth Counties, and 94xx attracted adverse comment from drivers who were happy with the moguls, Halls, and 8750 panniers (respectively) they already had and couldn't see the point, or the improvement, of the new locos.  The Manors did not initially steam well and work had to be done to the draughting and the shape of the chimney to get the work expected from them, and a similar thing happened with the Counties. 

 

The Swindon-built BR standard 4MT 4-6-0 used a domed version of the no.14 Manor boiler, and this loco was also the subject of different chimneys being used to get more work out of them; as well as the original both the WR and SR designed their own versions of double chimneys for these locos.  Black 5s were given double chimnesys as well by Ivatt, so 'Cromulent' could realistically have any one of a number of double chimneys fitted; the LMS Ivatt, County, and 75xxx WR or SR versions.

[Flying Pig]

6 hours ago, The Johnster said:

More or less, but the County was a 'red' route restricted loco, as was the Hall and BR 5MT, so a loco using an 8F boiler would have not had any particular advantage in terms of route availability even with a Hall chassis. 

 

I was thinking of width more than weight as a limiting factor outside GWR territory - basically the Ministry wanted an LMS class 5 equivalent from available parts and patterns.  Of course, Swindon could just have built LMS class 5s but that wouldn't make a story for @cypherman's model.  Which, as I look at it again, has the Hall cylinders anyway, so would probably be overwidth, thus sinking that idea...

 

It's still an interesting model.  At least being built at Swindon explains the funny colour.

[rodent279]

What about a Black 5 or Hall built using a B1 boiler? Not being a Belpaire, maybe that would have been cheaper to construct?

[cypherman]

Hi Flying Pig,

The funny colour as you call it is actually Railmatch BR green. It must be the lighting that is giving it it's odd colour.........

[Flying Pig]

2 hours ago, cypherman said:

Hi Flying Pig,

The funny colour as you call it is actually Railmatch BR green. It must be the lighting that is giving it it's odd colour.........

 

Exactly - not black