RMweb Premium Trainshed Terry Posted May 24, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 24, 2010 There had to be one lurking around to take the wrong branch. :P Terry. :P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I wrote down the name of the ship, but as my keyboard doesn't have a function to type in 'cyrillic' the closest approximation was "KPACHOKAMCK" This would be Krasnokamsk in English, so the ship was named for a smallish town in Perm Krai, Russia. A quick Google finds a photo of the ship itself! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Trainshed Terry Posted May 28, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 28, 2010 I have just found this little gem on the Pathe web site Kestrel hand over. Enjoy Terry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted May 29, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 29, 2010 Sadly probably not - it would be quite a different set of skills to construct a Kestrel replica. Why not? A spare 47 and a bit of fibreglass?.............. Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNCF stephen Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 This topic has fascinated me, it really has everything. A romantic vision of a well loved British Locomotive lurking somewhere in the depths of the Russian Railway System, the fact that this loco was the only one of its kind and most importantly the fact that no one seems to know exactly what has happened to it. I have to admit to not knowing a great deal about the locomotive but I do have a fondness for her all the same (who could not like that gorgeous design!). I also have a liking for a good mystery (the Mal Evans Beatles suitcase being another similar example that I am fond of!) and this Locomotive and its background really does provide a remarkable amount of material to go on. The simple facts that there are examples of locomotives rusting around the Russian Railway System indicates that HS4000 could still be around, but the fact that there seem to be 2 dates for when it was cut up seem to indicate that it might be long gone. One aspect of this little mystery that no one seems to have looked into is the engine from the locomotive. It was removed for static testing, but what happened to it after this testing had been completed. Would it not have had many more years of potential life? Could it have been used to reengine a stricken Russian Locomotive? I know that finding the engine would actually be even harder than the body, but without any further information it could (theoretically) still be around. I would certainly welcome any article investigating this mystery, however I believe that sending reporters and photographers over to Russia may only find rusting Russian relics in the sidings. If it does exist and it is found then I would certainly support any effort to bring it back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 If every "worthy" cause were preserved it would no longer have any value as people would be looking for the next worthy cause. That's life. At a time when all the early pioneer diesels were on the rails in the 1950s and 60s they were largely ignored by railway enthusiasts. At least you can re-live those days with models without having to scratchbuilt them, and then put them back in their boxes when you're bored. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackthorn Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 I have just found this little gem on the Pathe web site Kestrel hand over. Enjoy Terry. Nice find! Thanks for posting it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Brunel Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 Does anybody know what happened to the body? I believe it was separated from the chassis and used for "testing"...could it still be around? A suitable chassis could be built or modified. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted May 29, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 29, 2010 HS4000 was a monocoque construction and had no seperate chassis as such. Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vac_basher Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 HS4000 was a monocoque construction and had no seperate chassis as such. And most importantly, it was made of aluminum (wasn't it? ), so it couldn't have rusted away.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 And most importantly, it was made of aluminum (wasn't it? ), so it couldn't have rusted away.... I thought the body was of stressed steel construction? From that translation on page 1 of this thread.... "Body itself for the lightening it was necessary to carry out in the form prestressed construction, with the stress-bearing skin, fastened to the frame with the aid of the spot resistance welding. At the beginning of the 80's of the place of resistance welding they rusted and threw out from the pressure by finger. In connection with to our operating conditions this solution hardly can be considered acceptable". Parked up in a derelict condition in -400 C year on year. There can't have been much left that wasn't badly effected? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy C Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 With an idle moment just read through the thread. Having visited Russia last year, one thing that did amaze me though is the number of steamers actually laid up in sidings i saw two separate locations with sidings full, along with all sorts of other old and ancient rusting stock. At least that should keep the conspiracy theorists happy! A grabbed photo taken out of a coach on the way to Pushkin in which you can make out the top half of locos. The roofline of that loco on Google earth plus the length of it looks remarkably similar to this beastie I saw just outside St Petersburg last year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 I thought the body was of stressed steel construction? Everything I've ever read suggests it was structurally similar to a 47, apart from obviously the semi-streamlined cabs (of which, incidentally, Brian Webb says that Triplex supplied the screens as a 'special'). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinkmouse Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 Sounds to me like an ideal pitch for a programme to Timewatch or the Discovery Channel. Get someone like Pete Waterman or Robert Lewellyn to host it and you're sorted! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted May 30, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 30, 2010 Have a read of memories of a sulzer engineer where the author says At some point a Sulzer manager did visit Russia to assist HS4000 with some governor problems. During 1995 Geoff and the former Brush test bed foreman tried, through Sulzer Moscow, to see if the locomotive still existed, with the intent to try and bring it back to the UK. Unfortunately by the time of this request the locomotive had been scrapped. Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 Sounds to me like an ideal pitch for a programme to Timewatch or the Discovery Channel. Get someone like Pete Waterman or Robert Lewellyn to host it and you're sorted! Think the odds of Pete Waterman finding Kestrel are even longer than him writing a winning Eurovision song....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 No, it was secretly repatriated and added to the Strategic Reserve hidden away under Box Hill just found the thread and saw that please don't remind me, i feel like a bloomin ididot since i brought that up on the photoshop thread lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 Have a read of memories of a sulzer engineer... Andi Yes but it could have just been 'scrapped' on the paperwork, and not truly scrapped with the cutters torch. Again, we reach that black hole whereby we are saying Kestral was 'scrapped' when there is some form of evidence (no matter how valid it is) saying that the engine survived till 2001. Agreed the rusting process of the engine may be bad, but don't underestimate the quality of British steel and british paint (and think about it, it needed to be bloody thick stuff in russia to save them painting it all the time) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 The earlier calls for a reality check fell on deaf ears perhaps ? So the loco goes to the USSR. They study it and then use it on tests for a year or two, before removing the engine and stripping it of most of it's equipment. The redundant empty shell is then loaded with concrete blocks and used for a few years as a load for loco testing, before finally being dumped in some backwater siding to rot (mid to late 1970's ?). Mmm? I suspect it would have been in quite a bad state by then. The sorry looking wreck in the photo at the top of this thread is said to have been taken in 1985. Crikey that's 25 years ago! It appears to have been there for a good few years already. Heaven knows what would be left of it had it not been scrapped and had been left standing there for another 25 years? Also, note that the Russian report considered Kestrel to have been of too flimsy construction for the severe Russian climate and that the welds were all corroded through after only a few years use. A great shame indeed, especially for such a lovely looking loco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 Also, note that the Russian report considered Kestrel to have been of too flimsy construction for the severe Russian climate and that the welds were all corroded through after only a few years use. A great shame indeed, especially for such a lovely looking loco. I'm surprised they didn't re panel it or something, to make it cope with the climate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted May 30, 2010 Share Posted May 30, 2010 I'm surprised they didn't re panel it or something, to make it cope with the climate Why? The story goes that they only bought it for "research". They were finished with it after only a couple of years and the empty shell must have been of no use to them, hence it's subsequent short life as a concrete filled test load before being dumped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 fair play. i suppose it also depended on what they were researching for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 fair play. i suppose it also depended on what they were researching for. The drivetrain technology, particularly the 4000hp engine* and the alternator (innovative at the time). It's generally thought that Kestrel's acquisition was influential in the production of 4000hp diesels for use behind the Iron Curtain * As another aside, Brian Webb observes that Kestrel's 4000hp rating was in metric hp, which converts to 3,946 in Imperial, and that on test, its true rating was somewhere around 3,775. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Trainshed Terry Posted May 31, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 31, 2010 The drivetrain technology, particularly the 4000hp engine* and the alternator (innovative at the time). It's generally thought that Kestrel's acquisition was influential in the production of 4000hp diesels for use behind the Iron Curtain * As another aside, Brian Webb observes that Kestrel's 4000hp rating was in metric hp, which converts to 3,946 in Imperial, and that on test, its true rating was somewhere around 3,775. Some people say that at the time it was to advanced for the time when it was being developed. If the Kestrel was done today using the current technology in engine control and the design of the engine and up to date turbo chargers, I wonder how it would perform in today rail industry. Terry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 If the Kestrel was done today using the current technology in engine control and the design of the engine and up to date turbo chargers....... Given such changes, it wouldn't be Kestrel, but another design. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.