Jump to content
 

Prototype for everything corner.


Recommended Posts

On 05/03/2021 at 20:40, davebem said:

I guess its hard to model this unless you can find some HO class 66s

3562.1224626342.jpg

I have often wondered how UK locos 'sized up' against North American locos. The bogies seem to be of a similar size, but the 'Shed roof' apex is about level with the top of the bonnet.  I hadn't realised that they were that big.

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Courtybella said:

Class 57 hauling East Coast stock including driving van trailer to the cutters torch at Newport, South Wales.

 

 

 

I have just realised that I still haven't been on a Class 91 hauled train with Mk4 stock.

I remember when I first moved to Derbyshire in 1989, I would travel back to South Wales every weekend and go past the Metropolitan Cammell (?) Works in Birmingham and see the shiny new coaches in the sidings ready to go into service.

I am also still yet to travel on a Pendolino. 

As for Azumas, people will be sentimental about them by the time I get to go on one.

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 9C85 said:

I have often wondered how UK locos 'sized up' against North American locos. The bogies seem to be of a similar size, but the 'Shed roof' apex is about level with the top of the bonnet.  I hadn't realised that they were that big.

 


And then the trains can be significantly taller than the locos:

 

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/353101/

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, 9C85 said:

I have often wondered how UK locos 'sized up' against North American locos. The bogies seem to be of a similar size, but the 'Shed roof' apex is about level with the top of the bonnet.  I hadn't realised that they were that big.

 

Current US diesel locos are typically 15' 6" or so high & 10' 6" wide. (The UP Big Boy steam locos were 16' 2½" tall and 11' 0" wide)

Double stacks and Autoracks are considerably taller than that, typically triple deck Autoracks are 19' 11" - 20' 2" high & double stacks between 18' 2" & 20' 2"

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
7 hours ago, 9C85 said:

I have often wondered how UK locos 'sized up' against North American locos. The bogies seem to be of a similar size, but the 'Shed roof' apex is about level with the top of the bonnet.  I hadn't realised that they were that big.

 

The size of the locomotives is one thing, but the trains they pull can be difficult to grasp till you see one in full...

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, montyburns56 said:

A hitherto unknown Cuneo masterpiece discovered...

 

70 018 260270 Derwenthaugh Colliery D6772

 

It really does doesn’t it?! It’s the limited palette of colours and muted appearance that convinces the eye it may not be real. Circa 1970 or thereabouts by the looks of it. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Clicking on the picture of the class 37 takes you to Flickr where the following is provided in the caption:

Quote

A series of Photographs here taken at Derwenthaugh Colliery on the 26th of February 1970.

This one shows Class 37 D6772 of Gateshead approaching light engine.

 

Steven B.

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 08/03/2021 at 19:28, montyburns56 said:

A hitherto unknown Cuneo masterpiece discovered...

 

70 018 260270 Derwenthaugh Colliery D6772

 

Looking at the excellent photo again in a bit more detail, I see a couple of interesting things (to me at least). First, the signal facing the camera is a LQ "slotted" arm, and secondly, the two tall telegraph poles are outside the railway boundary carrying (assumed) GPO services over the railway. Probably the most direct route, and the GPO weren't going to let a railway line get in their way!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 08/03/2021 at 19:28, montyburns56 said:

A hitherto unknown Cuneo masterpiece discovered...

 

70 018 260270 Derwenthaugh Colliery D6772

 

 

Looks like a background scene from get Carter 

Was it just the RSH locos that were green over the cab roof?

NE locos seemed to be the ones with oval buffers could have been something to do with the amount of loose coupled trains they worked . The round oleos don't like hard knocks especially constantly 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
20 minutes ago, russ p said:

 

Looks like a background scene from get Carter 

Was it just the RSH locos that were green over the cab roof?

NE locos seemed to be the ones with oval buffers could have been something to do with the amount of loose coupled trains they worked . The round oleos don't like hard knocks especially constantly 

What prompts the decision to fit oval or round buffers? Is it dictated by traffic requirements, the type of routes worked, or what?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

What prompts the decision to fit oval or round buffers? Is it dictated by traffic requirements, the type of routes worked, or what?

 

The oval ones are quite a bit more heavy duty,  a lot thicker shaft

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
47 minutes ago, russ p said:

 

The oval ones are quite a bit more heavy duty,  a lot thicker shaft

But what is special about them being oval? Couldn't round ones be made just as strong?

Or is it just to make them readily identifiable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rodent279 said:

What prompts the decision to fit oval or round buffers? Is it dictated by traffic requirements, the type of routes worked, or what?

 

The large major axis of oval buffers leaves them less prone to buffer locking without requiring the mass of round buffers of that diameter.

 

Edited by SZ
  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, SZ said:

The large major axis of oval buffers leaves them less prone to buffer locking without requiring the mass of round buffers of that diameter.

 

Unless of course you have eyewatering vertical curvature. But if you're trying to avoid buffer locking in the vertical plane, it's probably a better solution in the long run to find the Civil Engineer and beat them repeatedly with a copy of the design standards until they fix the alignment.

  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RLBH said:

Unless of course you have eyewatering vertical curvature. But if you're trying to avoid buffer locking in the vertical plane, it's probably a better solution in the long run to find the Civil Engineer and beat them repeatedly with a copy of the design standards until they fix the alignment.

Might work. Tends not to make friends, though.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Much depends on the throw-over on curves: the longer the engine beyond the fixed wheelbase, the greater the misalignment of buffers and the greater the risk of buffer locking. It isn't a hard and fast rule tough: the Britannias got round buffers while 71000 had oval, although the overhang was near enough the same in both cases.

Edited by LMS2968
  • Agree 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...