Wright writes.....

[bbishop]

A comment on Niels post - most NER locomotives had six drivers.

 

Bill

[Mallard60022]

I am so sorry but that really should be a 4.6.4. It just looks unbalanced, wheel wise.

Phil

Edited April 2, 2019 by Mallard60022

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Niels said:

Lovely locomotive that was deemed out by Gresley

Machinery was like B16 that was better than Sandringhams.

Sandringhams had same machinery lay out as  Thompson/Peppercorn pacifics .

These pacifics were built after Gresley pacifics and was better or management made an error.

Same applies to the V2s that was built as A2/1.

If the Raven Pacific had received same loving care that the Gresleys got after loosing to GWR 4-6-0s,some nice locomotives had resulted.

It would have been even better if it had had 5feet8 wheels (B16) rather than the 6feet 9 it got.

Just dreaming

It's wonderful to dream,

 

I think it's fair to say that the original Gresley A1s weren't quite right (as the Exchanges in 1925 proved). I think it's also fair to say that, at the Grouping, there was little (if anything) to choose between the A1 and the A2 when the two were compared. However, the A1 was at its Genesis, whereas the A2 was at its Malachi (to use the Old Testament as a guide). The A1 was an entirely different concept in GNR loco development, not just an enlarged Ivatt Atlantic (which the first proposal showed), whereas the A2 was really just an enlarged Z. Making successful locos bigger, doesn't often work. Taking on board the lessons learned from the Castle exchanges, the A1s' valve gear was modified, and, with a higher boiler pressure, the A3 then appeared. Could the A2s valve gear and boiler have been developed in the same way? Inside valve gear on a 'modern' locomotive (perhaps all right for the GWR)? Didn't everything fit on to the leading coupled axle? I know all the gubbins were on the centre axle of an A1, but not inside valve gear cranks. The epithets 'Skittle Ally' and 'Cold Nose' are hardly complimentary, yet no such derogatory names were ever applied to the A1s/A3s. 

 

Losing to the the GWR 4-6-0 in 1925 was probably the best thing which could have happened to Gresley's Pacifics at the time. I doubt if any of those lessons learned could have been applied to the A2s. Ultimately, the surviving A3s (now with double chimneys) were among the last LNER-designed Pacifics to be withdrawn. Could anyone see the the Raven A2s surviving for a further 25+ years? I don't think so. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Headstock]

30 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Just one question if I may, please, Andrew,

 

I assume the 'incorrect', curly-tailed '6' is a transfer. If so, who makes it?

 

When Geoff Haynes painted my D3 in early BR livery, he had to hand-paint the '6' because no 'correct', 'incorrect' '6' was on the HMRS sheet. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Good evening Tony,

 

the curl six is available in the HMRS range but only in LNER Gill sans yellow. However, we badgered Modelmasters to produce the curly six some years back and they did so. They produce a pack with the British Railways tender legend and the numbers with curly six and nine, one pack in white and one in Yellow, they also at one time produced a cream version.

 

https://modelmaster.uk/search?controller=search&orderby=position&orderway=desc&search_query=curly+six&submit=Search

 

Edited April 2, 2019 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, micklner said:

Just found some pictures a NER Loco with six drivers !!

 

Full marks for observation in setting the 'LNER' branding below halfway on the tender sides, Mick,

 

Was this arrangement unique to some of the Raven A2s when fitted with Gresley tenders? On their original tenders, the LNER branding was in the normal position. It was also low on the tender towed by the A2 fitted with a Gresley boiler and cab, yet in the normal position on the tender towed by 2401. 

 

One of those livery quirks so fascinating to us modellers?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[micklner]

4 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

It's wonderful to dream,

 

I think it's fair to say that the original Gresley A1s weren't quite right (as the Exchanges in 1925 proved). I think it's also fair to say that, at the Grouping, there was little (if anything) to choose between the A1 and the A2 when the two were compared. However, the A1 was at its Genesis, whereas the A2 was at its Malachi (to use the Old Testament as a guide). The A1 was an entirely different concept in GNR loco development, not just an enlarged Ivatt Atlantic (which the first proposal showed), whereas the A2 was really just an enlarged Z. Making successful locos bigger, doesn't often work. Taking on board the lessons learned from the Castle exchanges, the A1s' valve gear was modified, and, with a higher boiler pressure, the A3 then appeared. Could the A2s valve gear and boiler have been developed in the same way? Inside valve gear on a 'modern' locomotive (perhaps all right for the GWR)? Didn't everything fit on to the leading coupled axle? I know all the gubbins were on the centre axle of an A1, but not inside valve gear cranks. The epithets 'Skittle Ally' and 'Cold Nose' are hardly complimentary, yet no such derogatory names were ever applied to the A1s/A3s. 

 

Losing to the the GWR 4-6-0 in 1925 was probably the best thing which could have happened to Gresley's Pacifics at the time. I doubt if any of those lessons learned could have been applied to the A2s. Ultimately, the surviving A3s (now with double chimneys) were among the last LNER-designed Pacifics to be withdrawn. Could anyone see the the Raven A2s surviving for a further 25+ years? I don't think so. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Realistically unless the LNER Board sacked Gresley the A2 was already doomed from the day of the amalgamation that formed the LNER. Can you imagine him dumping  his Pacific's in favour of the A2, I can't no matter how good the A2 was.

 

The A2 was a rushed design by Raven which only just appeared in NER days. As in Thompson's Pacific's it suffered early scrapping due to  being a small class as well ( other reasons as well). Gresley in fairness did try fitting a A1/3 Boiler on at least one as as an experiment when presumably the original Boiler wore out.. 

 

The NER hung all their big Locos valve gear on the front axle , so presumably it worked ok for them, as well as the inside motion did for the GWR.

[Niels]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 Could anyone see the the Raven A2s surviving for a further 25+ years? I don't think so. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

The B16s had  same machinery and crankshaft .(more or less)

Did a lot of revolutions during a very long life.

[Niels]

35 minutes ago, micklner said:

The NER hung all their big Locos valve gear on the front axle , so presumably it worked ok for them, as well as the inside motion did for the GWR.

And all the Midland compounds.

One crankthrow and six eccentrics on leading driving wheelset

[Headstock]

35 minutes ago, micklner said:

Realistically unless the LNER Board sacked Gresley the A2 was already doomed from the day of the amalgamation that formed the LNER. Can you imagine him dumping  his Pacific's in favour of the A2, I can't no matter how good the A2 was.

 

The A2 was a rushed design by Raven which only just appeared in NER days. As in Thompson's Pacific's it suffered early scrapping due to  being a small class as well ( other reasons as well). Gresley in fairness did try fitting a A1/3 Boiler on at least one as as an experiment when presumably the original Boiler wore out.. 

 

The NER hung all their big Locos valve gear on the front axle , so presumably it worked ok for them, as well as the inside motion did for the GWR.

 

Evening Mick,

it's a shame that your creations are not available to be seen on the exhibition circuit. There are so many dull exhibits these days that a layout featuring your work would shine like a beacon.

Personally, I would rather like to build one of the NE Atlantics, my Father saw them up close on a couple of occasions and was mightily impressed by them. One of them was the compound type, he said it was like a flying carpet coming down the track when viewed from an over bridge.

 

Did the forum pack up a little while a go, or is it just me that has a rubbish experience with the new software. I haven't photographed anything that I'm working on for ages, in the belief that uploading it would be a pain in the ass.

[Northmoor]

On 01/04/2019 at 17:03, Clive Mortimore said:

 

Here it is alongside a BR standard plough (ex V2 tender frame) and a 350 converted to a plough.

 

 

 

Oooh Clive, I might have to have a go at an 08 snowplough using one of my spare Lima bodies and chassis.  I remember reading somewhere that the prototypes were unstable so didn't get much use.  Never noticed before that the plough is offset, presumably to divert more material into the cess instead of another running line...?

Where did you get the measurements for the plough - or did you just (whisper) guess-timate from photographs?

[micklner]

2 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Mick,

it's a shame that your creations are not available to be seen on the exhibition circuit. There are so many dull exhibits these days that a layout featuring your work would shine like a beacon.

Personally, I would rather like to build one of the NE Atlantics, my Father saw them up close on a couple of occasions and was mightily impressed by them. One of them was the compound type, he said it was like a flying carpet coming down the track when viewed from an over bridge.

 

Did the forum pack up a little while a go, or is it just me that has a rubbish experience with the new software. I haven't photographed anything that I'm working on for ages, in the belief that uploading it would be a pain in the ass.

Exhibitions arent my scene I am afraid, as are clubs, I am a one man band with regard to modelling.

 

 The C6 is due at some point from Arthur K so you may have your wish, hopefully it will be much better than the old dog C7 kits of DJH I have already shown earlier. The Black NER Loco you posted earlier its type? it looks lovely.

 

I haven't had a problem posting images, the one good thing on this new Forum is that you can access all your earlier photos from old posts.  Other than that I prefer the old  format.

[Blandford1969]

12 minutes ago, micklner said:

Exhibitions arent my scene I am afraid, as are clubs, I am a one man band with regard to modelling.

 

 The C6 is due at some point from Arthur K so you may have your wish, hopefully it will be much better than the old dog C7 kits of DJH I have already shown earlier. The Black NER Loco you posted earlier its type? it looks lovely.

 

I haven't had a problem posting images, the one good thing on this new Forum is that you can access all your earlier photos from old posts.  Other than that I prefer the old  format.

Have you seen any test etches to build yet?

[Michael Edge]

This was the real ultimate NER express passenger loco.

 

I've just built another one of these, this time painted in fictitious BR blue by Dave Studley.

 

[micklner]

5 minutes ago, Blandford1969 said:

Have you seen any test etches to build yet?

Arthur K is the one to ask on that question. I haven't seen anything posted personally. 

[Jesse Sim]

The Raven A2 is such a brute I think! When I run trains, I get more of a kick when the A2 comes into view then any A1 or A3. I’m not sure if it’s because it’s a kitbuilt loco or because it’s a unique looking loco. 

 

I must point out that I did not build the one I have, it was purchased as is. 

 

Tony, we never worked out who built or painted it did we, all those years ago? 

Edited April 2, 2019 by Jesse Sim

[Headstock]

24 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

The Raven A2 is such a brute I think! When I run trains, I get more of a kick when the A2 comes into view then any A1 or A3. I’m not sure if it’s because it’s a kitbuilt loco or because it’s a unique looking loco. 

 

I must point out that I did not build the one I have, it was purchased as is. 

 

Tony, we never worked out who built or painted it did we, all those years ago? 

 

Evening Jesse,

 

probably a bit of both, but just wait for the buzz you will get when your own kit built loco is doing the same thing.

 

54 minutes ago, micklner said:

Exhibitions arent my scene I am afraid, as are clubs, I am a one man band with regard to modelling.

 

 The C6 is due at some point from Arthur K so you may have your wish, hopefully it will be much better than the old dog C7 kits of DJH I have already shown earlier. The Black NER Loco you posted earlier its type? it looks lovely.

 

I haven't had a problem posting images, the one good thing on this new Forum is that you can access all your earlier photos from old posts.  Other than that I prefer the old  format.

 

It's a B16/1. The C6 sounds like a lot of fun, I had better get my driving wheels sorted. Shame about the C7.

[Chamby]

2 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Tony,

 

the curl six is available in the HMRS range but only in LNER Gill sans yellow. However, we badgered Modelmasters to produce the curly six some years back and they did so. They produce a pack with the British Railways tender legend and the numbers with curly six and nine, one pack in white and one in Yellow, they also at one time produced a cream version.

 

https://modelmaster.uk/search?controller=search&orderby=position&orderway=desc&search_query=curly+six&submit=Search

 

 

Fox Transfers also produce the curly 6 & 9 as waterslide transfers in off-white.

[ArthurK]

1 hour ago, micklner said:

Arthur K is the one to ask on that question. I haven't seen anything posted personally. 

 

I have had test etches for the C6 (V09 version) since 2015. I was very unhappy with them and put them aside to concentrate on more urgent work. They  have languished around ever since but recently I have done more design work. I now have decided to do both versions. The projected time scale is 2020. I will concentrate on the Q7 first. It has been hanging around for too long (the first test etches for that were 2010).

 

This photo has appeared before but it might help to wet your appetite.

 

This is a  model of the original version that I scratch-built many years ago.

 

ArthurK

[St Enodoc]

8 hours ago, bbishop said:

A comment on Niels post - most NER locomotives had six drivers.

 

Bill

A bit crowded on the footplate then...

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, Headstock said:

I haven't photographed anything that I'm working on for ages, in the belief that uploading it would be a pain in the ass.

I actually find this to be one of the few things that is easier than in the old days.

 

Just go to "choose files" and select the ones you want from wherever they are stored. They will then appear as thumbnails below your text. Just highlight where you want each one to go and click on the little cross in the bottom left corner of the thumbnail. That's it.

[MarkC]

As I understand it, there was a bit of a push to get a Pacific built and operational before the Grouping, so as not to let the GNR have 'bragging rights' on 31st December 1922.

 

As has already been said, simply extending an existing design doesn't always work, and certainly the boiler barrel on the 4-6-2 Class (as they were known as by the NER) was too long; by the time the flue gases got to the forward end, much of their useful heat was gone - hence the 'cold noses' name, I would think.

 

Another weak point on the first two locomotives (Subsequently amended) was building them with inside bearing fitted trailing wheels. I would like to know what the thinking was here, seeing as an outside bearing trailing truck design was already in use on the Atlantics.

 

Regarding the cylinder/valves/running gear - yes, the same arrangement was used on the S3/B16, and they were fine, long lived locomotives, but there was never any serious attempt to extract more power from them in their original form, so it must have been accepted that they were at their optimum 'as built', and upgrades came at the not insignificant cost of rebuilding the front end. The same would have applied to the Pacifics, boiler issues notwithstanding.

 

Then there was the issue of minimum radii trackwork. By using the front end from the S3/B16, which was similar to other Raven locomotives such as his Class D (later H1) 4-4-4T and his Atlantics, there were clearance issues to consider between the bogie wheels and the cylinders. (As we modellers know only too well...). Bad enough on the Atlantics, but VERY limiting on the Pacifics. This won't have helped their case either when being compared to the Gresley Pacifics. Indeed, there is a story (and possibly a photo) of an Atlantic having a wheelset jammed against the cylinder, and I fancy that it won't have happened just once.

 

The Raven A2s were impressive looking machines, but to me they were very much a 'near miss' when compared to the Gresley Pacifics.

[Niels]

1 hour ago, MarkC said:

 

Then there was the issue of minimum radii trackwork. By using the front end from the S3/B16, which was similar to other Raven locomotives such as his Class D (later H1) 4-4-4T and his Atlantics, there were clearance issues to consider between the bogie wheels and the cylinders. (As we modellers know only too well...). Bad enough on the Atlantics, but VERY limiting on the Pacifics. This won't have helped their case either when being compared to the Gresley Pacifics. Indeed, there is a story (and possibly a photo) of an Atlantic having a wheelset jammed against the cylinder, and I fancy that it won't have happened just once.

 

The Raven A2s were impressive looking machines, but to me they were very much a 'near miss' when compared to the Gresley Pacifics.

The A2 had outside connecting rods sitting outside the coupling rods at a centerdistance of ,let me guess 6 feet 9inch.

If built as 100000 american front driven 4-4-0 with conrods inside coupling rods at say 6 feet three inch, there would have been no clearance problem.

A2 and B16 and Q7 shared same cylinder block and on Q7 it was imposible to drive first wheelset so the idea of standartisation was the culprit.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Niels

[drmditch]

Re: NE designs. Ken Hoole, in his book on the NER Atlantics, records a Z coming into Darlington Bank Top with the rear bogie wheels locked and skidding.

 

Perhaps the final verdict on the 'congested' leading crank axles should come from someone who had to maintain them?

 

For all the criticism of the Raven A2s, their ability to make steam (at least when driven by well-motivated crews) was equal to that of the original Gresley A1s. The replacement of City of Ripon's boiler was done to provide a 'float' for maintaining the remainder if the class, none having been provided previously. 

 

After all, it was boiler life and cost of maintenance that was the major factor in the longevity (or otherwise) of a small (numerically!) class.

[MarkC]

Just now, drmditch said:

Re: NE designs. Ken Hoole, in his book on the NER Atlantics, records a Z coming into Darlington Bank Top with the rear bogie wheels locked and skidding.

 

Perhaps the final verdict on the 'congested' leading crank axles should come from someone who had to maintain them?

 

For all the criticism of the Raven A2s, their ability to make steam (at least when driven by well-motivated crews) was equal to that of the original Gresley A1s. The replacement of City of Ripon's boiler was done to provide a 'float' for maintaining the remainder if the class, none having been provided previously. 

 

After all, it was boiler life and cost of maintenance that was the major factor in the longevity (or otherwise) of a small (numerically!) class.

Thanks - I couldn't remember where I'd seen the original report,

 

As for the rest - agreed, they could make steam, but at what cost? ISTR that they were more fuel-hungry than even the original A1s. Totally agree too about boilers - that was a prime reason why the V4s were scrapped so early, wasn't it - no new boiler available & a class of only 2 locomotives. It wasn't going to matter how good the design was - in 1957 the axe was going to fall.

[Niels]

10 minutes ago, drmditch said:

 

 

Perhaps the final verdict on the 'congested' leading crank axles should come from someone who had to maintain them?

 

 

The common inside cylindered locomotive had two crankthrows and four eccentrics between frames.

The A2 with one throw and six eccentrics sounds easier to me.

Especially as they are more accesible due to front wheel drive