Imaginary Locomotives

[Guest Max Stafford]

According to Peter Grafton, author of "Edward Thompson of the LNER", Robinson declined the post because approaching 70 he felt he was getting a bit old. The group's directors favoured Raven, but as the directors wanted the CME to base himself at King's Cross, Raven declined the post also.

What then transpired is well documented, but I have to say, the Raven scenario would have undoubtedly given us an electrified Anglo-Scottish mainline decades earlier than was the actual case.

 

Dave.

[John B]

 

What then transpired is well documented, but I have to say, the Raven scenario would have undoubtedly given us an electrified Anglo-Scottish mainline decades earlier than was the actual case.

 

Dave.

 

It's a lovely flight of fancy that takes one to the 1930s and the early Raven electrics getting on a bit, maybe the LNER would have turned an eye across the pond to the Pennsylvania Railroad and had a few GG1s outshopped in Garter Blue and Apple Green. Suitably shrunk, of course...

[Guest Max Stafford]

I wonder how the LMS would have responded. Another scenario that interests me is that of the BTC accepting the Northern Hydro Electric Board's proposals for the Highland lines. EM1s with Mountain names anyone?

 

Dave.

[John B]

I wonder how the LMS would have responded. Another scenario that interests me is that of the BTC accepting the Northern Hydro Electric Board's proposals for the Highland lines. EM1s with Mountain names anyone?

 

Dave.

 

Oh, get thee behind me, satan! How about a Milwaukee Road "Little Joe" slogging up Slochd?

[PhilJ W]

It's a lovely flight of fancy that takes one to the 1930s and the early Raven electrics getting on a bit, maybe the LNER would have turned an eye across the pond to the Pennsylvania Railroad and had a few GG1s outshopped in Garter Blue and Apple Green. Suitably shrunk, of course...

 

Don't forget that Gresley designed the prototype of what became class 76, this would have taken the place of many of the B, K and even the V class steam locomotives. The ECML would probably have been operated by a streamlined version, perhaps 'A4' shaped with the train 'topped and tailed' like an IC125.

As for the Great Western as they looked towards Switzerland for some new technology one could imagine a 'Crocodile' pulling an express over the Devon banks.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

A red A1 ? He (Gresley) would have had to get rid of Anderson and the rest of the old Midland chumps otherwise his Pacific would have been a compound with a 3,500 gallon tender and the axleboxes off a 4F.

All the evidence suggests that (a.) he was nobody's fool, and (b.) of an independent and vigorous cast of mind. I rather think he would have negotiated for the necessary conditions before accepting the CME's office.

 

He would have discovered the same talented engineering team at Crewe, that Stanier exploited to such effect; and would most likely have brought Bulleid with him to terrify the wet faction from Derby. What then? Obviously he quickly persuades the board of the horrible boob of loosing continuity with the LNWR, and the two tone coach livery is restored as LMS standard. Crewe is put to work designing and building an array of wide firebox types, and by 1939 the LMS is in possession of a mechanically fired 4-8-4 capable of running a five and a half hour service Euston - Glasgow, with the equivalent 2-10-4 unit handling the heaviest freight. The celebrated 'Black 7' 2-8-2 of which 2,000 have by then been erected runs the large majority of mainline services, equally at home on slow freight and all but the fastest passenger work. This is inevitably adopted as the wartime standard loco, and thousands more of a simplified two cylinder version are built for service all over the UK, and for continental use following the invasion.

[Allegheny1600]

the wet faction from Derby.

 

 

Brilliant!!!! Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

OMG, my sides are aching!

Seriously,

That would have made a stunning LMS with 4-8-4's, 2-10-4's and 2-8-2's but surely the 2-8-2's would have been more like 'Black nines'?? Imagine also if the LMS Garratts had still been built but around a full B-P design rather than the pathetic insistance on midland standards for axleboxes and bearings etc? They would have been great workhorses then!

Cheers, John E.

[James]

Brilliant!!!! Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

OMG, my sides are aching!

Seriously,

That would have made a stunning LMS with 4-8-4's, 2-10-4's and 2-8-2's but surely the 2-8-2's would have been more like 'Black nines'?? Imagine also if the LMS Garratts had still been built but around a full B-P design rather than the pathetic insistance on midland standards for axleboxes and bearings etc? They would have been great workhorses then!

 

I think they'd have lasted much longer then; assuming the same desire to rid the country of steam I think they could have been amoung the last to be withdrawn if they were efficient as Beyer-Garretts in other countries were and were concentrated on specific flows where they power and flexiblity would have been used fully.

[Guest Max Stafford]

A big Gresley Garratt? That would have been one hellfire Shap banker!

 

Dave.

[coachmann]

A big Gresley Garratt? That would have been one hellfire Shap banker!

Talking of bankers, what's the betting Bullied wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes on the LMS.....

[AMJ]

Long time ago in a galaxy far far away I repainted a Triang Dock shunter into BR green. It was sold at an autojumble at York so might still be in the locality. Sorry no photos but it looked convincing as a BR diesel shunter.

[The Stationmaster]

A big Gresley Garratt? That would have been one hellfire Shap banker!

 

Dave.

 

A Gresley Garratt - a bit like his other one perhaps?

http://www.lner.info/locos/U/u1.shtml

[AMJ]

One thought would be how about changing the gauge on one of the SAR 3'6" locos such as a GMAM to standard and then thrashing it on say the NYMR?

 

 

[Guest Max Stafford]

Could be an interesting commission for Alan Gibson...

 

Dave.

[asmay2002]

Don't forget that Gresley designed the prototype of what became class 76, this would have taken the place of many of the B, K and even the V class steam locomotives. The ECML would probably have been operated by a streamlined version, perhaps 'A4' shaped with the train 'topped and tailed' like an IC125.

 

The 76's were notoriously unstable at speed (and limited to 65mph) because of the bizarre Gresley bogie design which is why the 77's used the Derby designed bogie from 10000.

[Guest Max Stafford]

The Woodhead isn't a natural route for high speed operation though. I suspect that such problems would have been quickly ironed out in an ECML situation. Remember the rough riding qualities encountered with the AC electrics in their earlier days.

 

Dave.

[The Black Hat]

While many wont be surprised with the fact that Im very pro-Raven, with the idea that although Gresley was great, the ideas that could have been pushed could have meant that the Railway system would have been much different by the time of any kind of Beeching style review post-war. However, my attentions were turned in this threat to the ideas of projects that were designed, but never built, or concieved, but not acted upon. BR was thinking of re-engineing the class 37s in the mid 1980s which could have meant a new class 38 or 39 bringing about body-snatcher locomotives some 20 years earlier.

 

What about units too... a lot is made of locomotives but I think adapting the class 151 unit could have been interesting. Other ideas for a unit could be a single car 158 unit rather than rip apart the 155 to make a 153 which is underpowered and has the squat cab on one end. Hardly brilliant for the traincrew. Early sprinters such as the class 150 still have a working hand lever for the crew to enter a compartment for the cab, rather than the service doors. Imagine if that was a specification and more train still had a guard compartment, akin to first generation units.

 

Plenty of ideas to come im sure....

[cheesysmith]

The Woodhead isn't a natural route for high speed operation though. I suspect that such problems would have been quickly ironed out in an ECML situation. Remember the rough riding qualities encountered with the AC electrics in their earlier days.

 

Dave.

 

The woodhead overhead was only designed for a maximum speed of 85mph, but the co-co`s were capable of a lot more (unconfirmed stories say that when one was taken out of store and shown to the ns the driver was a bit liberal with the speed limits, and topped 100mph, all in perfect stability). The bo+bo`s were excelent pullers for freight use, when one derailed it`s train, the driver just cranked on more juice, and contiued to pull a derailed train. When asked, the driver felt summert, but it just kept going.

 

For the modernisation diesels, ignore the peaks and wistlers, we have the lms twins. For you diesel hydralics, the power was always limited by the transmission. The warships could have been a 3000hp bo-bo at 82 tons, using the valenca engine at it`s full power output and the transmission from the hymecks. It would have got rid of the biggest problem br had with the hydralics, which was the more frigile greman engines, that required more tlc that br gave. Also, br sould have made the early diesels with eth and dual brakes from the start. The problem with the warship was that br couldn`t find room to fit air braking to them, so they went early.

 

And, you could also have less 47`s, and more 50`s. The 50`s were ordered when the engine problems of the 47`s had appeared. And before it gets into a contest between the duffs and hovers, remember the hovers were never downrated, and for most of their lives the duffs were only 2580hp.

 

Cheesysmith

 

Who would like to have seen a em2 version built as a ac loco to compair against the al1-5.

[t-b-g]

There was no need of Robinson 'Pacifics'. The hoped for traffic on the new mainline never materialized, and in anycase, the large engines he did build were mostly a flop. Pity, as they were beautiful designs. It would be interesting to start with an LMS 'Jubilee', Caprotti valvegear, and build a cosmetic GCR 9P Lord Faringdon so that it would have properly proportioned boiler/firebox and ashpan and modern front end.

 

The rebuilt B3s with the Caprotti gear looked awful! In our imaginery loco thread, can't we pretend that Robinson kept tinkering with the 4-6-0 designs and eventually cracked it with a loco that looked wonderful and performed as well. Having said that, recent writings by people around at the time (notably Richard Hardy in articles in the GC magazine "Forward") tend to restore some of the reputation of the 4-6-0s. He seemed very fond of some of them and reckoned that they were masters of the work they were given. I might get the number wrong but there is one story of the staff at Retford turning out to see a B7 on something like a 32 carriage train during the war! It is rare to see or hear anything bad about the Atlantics, Directors, O4s and J11s and he must have been very close to getting the others right. The LNER Garratt was proposed before grouping by the GCR and was to have been 2 O4 frames back to back. There is another might have been to play with, especially now the Bachmann one is available to butcher!

[S.A.C Martin]

 

Gresley W2? A cut and shut, based on certain aspects of Gresley designs that were never built (the rear bogie comes from a proposed 4-8-4 locomotive!)

 

I'm going so far as to actually build this as a project for a staff competition on another forum:

 

 

Believable? No. Fun to design and now build? Yes, definitely. Once finished, it will be a fun bit of "playing with people's heads" when I get my dream exhibition layout built (in, oh, thirty years time...!)

[Doorslammer]

 

Gresley W2? A cut and shut, based on certain aspects of Gresley designs that were never built (the rear bogie comes from a proposed 4-8-4 locomotive!)

 

I'm going so far as to actually build this as a project for a staff competition on another forum:

 

 

Believable? No. Fun to design and now build? Yes, definitely. Once finished, it will be a fun bit of "playing with people's heads" when I get my dream exhibition layout built (in, oh, thirty years time...!)

 

Should be quite an interesting build when completed.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... Gresley W2...

Does this machine have a much larger grate/ashpan and mechnical stoker? (It ought to really as these are the factors that will increase sustained power output potential, and are a justification for a trailing bogie. Presumably you then take care of the water consumption with higher BP and a much enlarged superheater. But coal, you wil be burning lots more coal, and both the A4 and the A1 could eat their way through the nominal 10ton capacity if worked hard London to Edinburgh. Make the tender body longer, and have an extra 10 tons of coal on board, then the thing can do a sustained 4,000dbhp from a 70sq ft or thereabouts grate, and we don't need Deltic or the HST. The tender is aluminium alloy you see, the weight saved in structure enabling the load increase for no increase in all-up weight loaded.

 

Oh yes, nearly forgot, you need to enlarge the exhaust ejector area in direct proportion to the increase in grate area.

[PhilJ W]

Does this machine have a much larger grate/ashpan and mechnical stoker? But coal, you wil be burning lots more coal, and both the A4 and the A1 could eat their way through the nominal 10ton capacity if worked hard London to Edinburgh. Make the tender body longer, and have an extra 10 tons of coal on board, then the thing can do a sustained 4,000dbhp from a 70sq ft or thereabouts grate, and we don't need Deltic or the HST. The tender is aluminium alloy you see, the weight saved in structure enabling the load increase for no increase in all-up weight loaded.

 

Oh yes, nearly forgot, you need to enlarge the exhaust ejector area in direct proportion to the increase in grate area.

Perhaps a 10 wheel tender, or even a 12 wheeler, it will be on bogies of course 4+6 or 6+6.

[Bernard Lamb]

I believe that there was at one time a proposal to down rate the class 21s and rebuild them with a cab at one end only like the 20s for use on freight duties. Any body ever see a drawing of such a beast?

Bernard

[S.A.C Martin]

Does this machine have a much larger grate/ashpan and mechnical stoker? (It ought to really as these are the factors that will increase sustained power output potential, and are a justification for a trailing bogie. Presumably you then take care of the water consumption with higher BP and a much enlarged superheater. But coal, you wil be burning lots more coal, and both the A4 and the A1 could eat their way through the nominal 10ton capacity if worked hard London to Edinburgh. Make the tender body longer, and have an extra 10 tons of coal on board, then the thing can do a sustained 4,000dbhp from a 70sq ft or thereabouts grate, and we don't need Deltic or the HST. The tender is aluminium alloy you see, the weight saved in structure enabling the load increase for no increase in all-up weight loaded.

 

Oh yes, nearly forgot, you need to enlarge the exhaust ejector area in direct proportion to the increase in grate area.

 

...None of that I can actually put into the model, mind, but as a back story, perhaps.