Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold

Prompted by a post on another forum, I've rekindled my thoughts on what non-steam power on Sodor might look like.

I already have the bodyshell for the ex-WC&P railcar, acquired after the closure of that line, but what of the other locos?

 

The Peel Godred branch is electrified, powered using hydro from the dams in the centre of the island.

My current plan is that the NWR acquired mothballed NER electric EF1 Bo-Bo locos in the 1920s after the coal traffic they were built for slumped.

I expect these would be overdue for replacement in the post-WW2 period, and I wanted to find a suitable 1500v DC locomotive type. I had considered the Woodhead electrics, but I think that the NWR deserves to be able to buy its own locomotive types from one of the larger builders.

They'd already bought products of Beyer, Peacock, so I am thinking of something along the lines of the NSW Class 46 Co-Cos built in 1956-1958, shrunk to fit the UK loading gauge.

1024px-4615_locomotive_at_the_Junee_Roun

I think this may be achievable using the Ausciscion Models HO version, which is expensive but a nice model. Possibly by replacing certain items with 1:76 scale versions, I can make it fit the OO layout better.

In OO, a BR class 86 scales out at about 52mm high, in HO the 46 is 50.8mm, so it's not far off.

I am contemplating replacing the distinctive portholes with rectangular windows, and swapping the large central headlights for something else, to retain the BP flavour but with more NWR type styling. Livery would likely be a variation of the NWR lined blue.

Possibly mounting the bufferbeam on the body rather than the bogies will also change the appearance, though I understand this implies the body is stronger as it is taking more of the drawbar load.

Still mulling it over!

Edited by Corbs
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said:

Did you consider the BR Class 82?  Beyer, Peacock built those for BR.    Maybe clipping the nose on an 82 to better resemble the NSW Class 46? 

It's a good point, and I do like the look of them, but was put off something along the lines of the BR Class 8Xs because to me, they are very 1960s-looking AC electrics, and I wanted something a bit more in-between that reflected the styling of the immediate post-war period, and was derived from a fellow 1500v DC design rather than 25kV AC. 

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

Something in the back of my mind says that the NSW 46's were similar in any case to the Woodhead EM1/ 76, with Metrovick electrical equipment and the same Bo+Bo wheel arrangement, i.e. bogies joined together.

 

I may however be wrong, so perhaps someone could confirm?

 

You could also go for a shrunken Soviet version of the same thing, which operate as fixed pairs, the VL8's, seen here at Slavyansk in the eastern Ukraine in May 2010.

 

 

IMG_1923web.jpg

Edited by John Tomlinson
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

ah! Whilst I may not be going that crazy, these things will need to be powerful. The route up the valley is steep, and Alumina travels in the uphill direction.

 

Alumina's density is 3.95 g/cm³, compared to iron ore at 2.5 g/cm³, so the bulk trains could end up being heavy (a good reason for the garratt being stationed at Wellsworth...).

 

If I go for body-mounted drawbars I'll likely need to beef the solebars up as I suspect the NSW 46 is as you say Bo+Bo, though I have not yet found written record of them being as bad as the 76 and 77s in terms of springing back and forth, unless these problems were solved by the time the 46s were built?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking of your lovely Garratt in raising the idea of a "double electric", for substantial commodity traffic.

 

If the NSW 46's date from 1956 - 58 then the 76's would have been in service for several years beforehand. Wath to Dunford Bridge went electric in February 1952, with the full opening through the new Woodhead tunnel in September 1954. So yes, I guess they would have been able to learn from those years and improve the springing. Again in the back of my mind is that the 76's weren't meant to be Bo+Bo, but that the linkage was added early on because of the riding problems.

 

I don't want to clog your thread, but it might be of interest to see the VL8 linkages. Each of these is a Bo+Bo, then another permanently coupled. Not so far from the pairs of 76's in their last decade on the mgr's. The two VL8 pics are in Krasny Liman works in the eastern Ukraine, and you can see the linkages are just male and female extensions to the castings that sit on top of each other. The nearest two are one type, the farthest the other. Sorry the pic is a bit dark, but works lighting out there wasn't to western standards;

 

IMG_1945web.jpg

IMG_1944web.jpg

Edited by John Tomlinson
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Ahh that's interesting. Is the pin between every set of bogies, or are they in pairs with different couplings between the units?

 

Something I have dug up thanks to the 'Imaginary Locomotives' thread on this very forum...

 

46.png

 

Shows a coupling between the bogies.

 

I'll have to get hold of one and have a look at it, if the standard coupling/buffer height is ok for UK 00 then I'll stick with that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The NSWGR 46 was definitely a Co+Co with a drawbar/traction link between the bogies, hence (in part) having bogie-mounted buffer beams as well.

Contemporary press release mentioning such :  https://www.records.nsw.gov.au/image/16410_a111_6_000246

Picture where you can sort of see it  :  https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3115/2533612904_edb212d029_b.jpg

Presumably, the mechanical arrangements of the NSWGR 46 bear at least some resemblance to the original plans for the EM2 before those got hastily redesigned with LMS10000 derived bogies after the EM1's were running qualities were revealed.  That said, the 46 is considerably more powerful, so there can't be too much in common.

 

If taking a CIE MetroVick A ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_001_Class ) or C( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_201_Class ) class and revamping the roof to add pantographs doesn't appeal, how about these?  (Sorry it's all links, I'm wary of reposting photos that aren't mine)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T5JRUyh5DxY/Tb1iWZOxiYI/AAAAAAAAAIg/o2_HIpHNBWI/s1600/MV+Brasil+Photo+06.jpg

Supplied to two mining railways in Brazil by MetroVick in 1952.  3000v metre gauge in reality, but the British loading gauge being what it is, even a metre gauge loco wouldn't look out of place here.  Oh, and the original livery for at least one of the lines was a very BTC gloss black and silver with a chrome waist-stripe.  I don't think anyone actually makes a model, but it's a nice simple shape, and plenty more information is out there.  And you were freelancing anyway.

http://vfco.brazilia.jor.br/locomotivas/SR-5-RFFSA-Rede-Ferroviaria-Federal/25-eletrica-Metropolitan-Vickers.shtml

http://www.oestedeminas.org.br/2011/05/as-eletricas-da-rmv.html

I like them anyway.  And I'd definitely go for all-purpose Bo-Bo units, and double head as necessary...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/johannes-j-smit/30409838153

 

 J.

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

Have a look at the PRR electric locos. Especially the P5. They were one of the first long distance main line electrification and plenty of people came from around the world to see what they were doing. The P5 used a big cast frame with the motors in the centre, smaller carrying wheels or bogies at either end, with a simple box body on top. Think of a steam loco as a 2-8-2 without the connecting rods and a box body on top.

 

Now imagine if the woodhead had been electrified in GC days, and you have instead of the Robinson 2-8-0 steam loco, you have a 2-8-2 electric with a box body. You could extend the concept and have a 2-6-2 for lighter freights, or a 4-6-4 for passenger trains.

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

  • RMweb Gold
13 hours ago, cheesysmith said:

Have a look at the PRR electric locos. Especially the P5. They were one of the first long distance main line electrification and plenty of people came from around the world to see what they were doing. The P5 used a big cast frame with the motors in the centre, smaller carrying wheels or bogies at either end, with a simple box body on top. Think of a steam loco as a 2-8-2 without the connecting rods and a box body on top.

 

Now imagine if the woodhead had been electrified in GC days, and you have instead of the Robinson 2-8-0 steam loco, you have a 2-8-2 electric with a box body. You could extend the concept and have a 2-6-2 for lighter freights, or a 4-6-4 for passenger trains.

 

I get what you mean and it does sound impressive, but it's not really what I'm after (i.e. an almost off-the-shelf design from a UK manufacturer in the mid 1950s). One for the 'imaginary locomotives' thread perhaps? The only UK one I can think of that's similar is EE1 but that's from about 30 years before.

@John Tomlinson I think the drawing is of a standard Class 46?

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, its me getting muddled. I assumed that as your drawing came from the "imaginary locos" thread, it was of an imaginary subject. Duh!!

 

Looking at the photo of 4615 above it does appear to match the subject of the drawing.

 

John.

Edited by John Tomlinson
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The FS Class? About 20 years too early, my thinking is the EF1 Bo-Bos would not have been replaced that early, the real EF1s were withdrawn in 1950 having been stored since 1935, so I don't think it's out of the question to run my 3 into the ground and scrap them 6-7 years later?

I'm pretty set on getting and modifying an NSW 46 Class now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 22:08, Corbs said:

...Possibly by replacing certain items with 1:76 scale versions, I can make it fit the OO layout better.

In OO, a BR class 86 scales out at about 52mm high, in HO the 46 is 50.8mm, so it's not far off.

If you can replace the wheelsets for some in the range 2 to 3mm larger in diameter, you will be there or thereabouts for overall height, and the model will probably look better for 4mm purposes.

 

I would so keep the portholes though, very immediately post war private builder; and definitely not a BR thing.

  • Like 2
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...