Imaginary Locomotives

[tythatguy1312]

51 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

I'm not convinced the problems with Dugald Drummond's 4-6-0s were entirely down to grate design.

That much is obvious. Actually looking at Drummond's 4-6-0's indicates that an oversized firebox was 1 of several flaws, namely the 4 cylinder layout, constricted ash-pan layout, incredibly poor drafting and the use of experimental & unneeded technology, namely Drummond's water tube addition. These flaws seem to be what made the locomotives worse than the 4-4-0's they failed to replace.

[Compound2632]

1 minute ago, tythatguy1312 said:

namely Drummond's water tube addition. 

 

The firebox cross water tubes had been used without ill effect on several of Drummond's 4-4-0 designs for the LSWR. They were not in fact Drummond's design but a patent by Walter Mackerzie Smith, Wilson Worsdell's Chief Draughtsman at Gateshead. Smith had been chief draughtsman to S.W. Johnson at Cowlairs on the E&GR in the 60s, where Drummond had been, I think, assistant works manager, William Stroudley being works manager. Drummond went with Stroudley to Inverness and Smith with Johnson to Stratford but life-long friendships had been formed. Smith it was who persuaded Johnson to take up piston valves and compounding.

 

Between his Stratford and Gateshead posts, Smith had been in Japan running the locomotive side of the Imperial Railways. 

[Flying Fox 34F]

12 hours ago, burgundy said:

This one?

According to Chris Bailey's book on Railways of Romania, the first batch of P8s and some second hand examples, sent as WW1 reparations, were German built, but over 200 P8s were built under licence by Malaxa and Resita. There is no mention of any construction by the Vulcan Foundry. I wonder whether the company is actually AG Vulcan Stettin who may have built some of the German locos?

Best wishes 

Eric 

Eric,

 

Thank you for information.  It was a local railway man in Sinaia who said it was British built.  Like myself he is no doubt unaware of the German company.  I have photos of this locomotive when it was first put on display minus the fence.  Unfortunately, it’s condition is deteriorating.

 

Paul

[Mike 84C]

Talking of grates why was the French trapezoidal grate not tried in Britain? wide at the rear but dipping down between the frames at the front. Maybe the high quality of coal in this country had much to do with it and the higher quality compared with French coal.

[Player of trains]

Shameless cross posting from my thread in Pre-Grouping but I think my newest design belongs here. 
 

Chevrilshire & South Coast Railway Class 8 2-8-2t “Easterns” first built in 1903 by NBL

 

 

 

 

https://imgur.com/YO69Yhn

The cad work has entirely been done in Tinkercad and it’s printing now on my Photon Mono4k, plan is to fit the body around a Heljan 47xx chassis. It’s all largely freelance but takes heavy influence from Drummond family locos and the influence they had on Belgian design such as the large Atlantic tanks derived off Caledonian drawings as well as the various big tanks of the LBSCR 

[DenysW]

7 minutes ago, Player of trains said:

I think my newest design belongs here.

Is it under-supplied with coal for all the power delivered through those wheels?

[Player of trains]

21 minutes ago, DenysW said:

Is it under-supplied with coal for all the power delivered through those wheels?

 

The bunker is a bit under sized I suppose but it does project significantly into the cab, it's a design that's not particularly going far or fast. It's filling an equivalent role of the Churchward 42XX tanks just on oil trains 

[RedGemAlchemist]

On 21/02/2023 at 16:05, Player of trains said:

Shameless cross posting from my thread in Pre-Grouping but I think my newest design belongs here. 
 

Chevrilshire & South Coast Railway Class 8 2-8-2t “Easterns” first built in 1903 by NBL

 

 

 

 

https://imgur.com/YO69Yhn

The cad work has entirely been done in Tinkercad and it’s printing now on my Photon Mono4k, plan is to fit the body around a Heljan 47xx chassis. It’s all largely freelance but takes heavy influence from Drummond family locos and the influence they had on Belgian design such as the large Atlantic tanks derived off Caledonian drawings as well as the various big tanks of the LBSCR 

@Paleopotato09. I know he loves himself a large tank loco.

[DenysW]

I'm sorry to (potentially) start a pi$$ing contest, but this is the definitive large tank loco, and comes from K.Bay.Sts.B.:

 

 

This leaves aside whether Garratts and Kitson-Meyers are technically tank engines, and ignores M. du Bousquet's epic 0-6-2+2-6-0 contribution.

[AlfaZagato]

I think I have one of those, from Rivarossi in DB black/red.

 

As far as a Mallet can be, fairly conventional.    All the way back on page 1 or so, Mike Edge posted his build of a proposed 'Horwich Mallet.'   Not quite a tank, to be sure.

[Player of trains]

18 minutes ago, DenysW said:

I'm sorry to (potentially) start a pi$$ing contest, but this is the definitive large tank loco, and comes from K.Bay.Sts.B.:

 

 

This leaves aside whether Garratts and Kitson-Meyers are technically tank engines, and ignores M. du Bousquet's epic 0-6-2+2-6-0 contribution.

 

It's for sure a definitive large tank engine and bloody gorgeous but I think the French and Dutch will have a contender for the title with their beautiful 4-8-4 tanks. But these are real not imaginary. I'm pushing the boat out as it was never built than imaginary but I am slowly working on getting materials together for designing an 0-6-6-0 Meyer based off the 1905 proposal by Kitson for the H&B for banking between the Sugarloaf tunnels. 

[rockershovel]

On 19/02/2023 at 18:35, The Johnster said:

While we are discussing exposure to dangerous materials and the possible effect they may have on exposed workers many years later, first generation dmus were in service from around 1956 until the late 80s.  Their heating systems worked with ductcing and fans blowing engine manifold heat about the train, and were very effective, but the ducting was lined with asbestos sheeting, from which the units' famous vibrations usually ensured a good bit of lethal brown asbestos dust blown into the drivers face if he switched the heating on after a few hours running, such as a cool summer evening.  Couldn't have done the passengers much good either. 

Speaking of exposure to brake dust, the HST 125s used to draw fumes from the brakes into the ventilation at times. Just another of the minor delights of life as an ECML commuter....

[rockershovel]

On 20/02/2023 at 17:33, tythatguy1312 said:

British thinking of the time, to put it lightly, was highly based on the success of 4-4-0's, engines which traditionally carried narrow fireboxes. I'm frankly unsure of the reason Ivatt elected for a wide firebox on the Large Atlantics, though it wouldn't exactly shock me if the GNR's American Influence predated the A1 development considering their ownership of an American 4-2-2 for a few years.


Also of note is that the P8's firebox grate area of 27.98 square feet was entirely achievable with a narrow firebox designs, with the Drummond 4-6-0's carrying significantly larger firebox grates at 31.5 square feet. Now that proved to be less than ideal considering that the Drummond 4-6-0's couldn't be worked hard in the slightest, but it does show that the P8's layout has no real advantage compared to narrow grates.

What a corker that is. Quite discourages anyone from designing never-wazzers, when things like that were running around the real world...

[Flying Pig]

37 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

What a corker that is. Quite discourages anyone from designing never-wazzers, when things like that were running around the real world...

 

Well not really, because when you design something that looks like it was fired through the firebox crown, you at least have a prototype to point to.

[rockershovel]

14 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Well not really, because when you design something that looks like it was fired through the firebox crown, you at least have a prototype to point to.

That cut-down cab looks very odd, doesn't it? Loading gauge issues, I suppose. I'd guess that it is actually a "deckless" cab with the fireman working from the front of the tender, but you have to wonder how it was driven if so. 

[rockershovel]

 

6 hours ago, DenysW said:

I'm sorry to (potentially) start a pi$$ing contest, but this is the definitive large tank loco, and comes from K.Bay.Sts.B.:

 

 

This leaves aside whether Garratts and Kitson-Meyers are technically tank engines, and ignores M. du Bousquet's epic 0-6-2+2-6-0 contribution.

Of course Garratts are tank locos! Where are their tenders, if not? Except for South African types with water tenders ...

 

Same goes for Kitsons, although some of THOSE had additional water tenders. 

 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2023 by rockershovel

[rockershovel]

On the subject of locos which defy the wildest imagination, what on Earth is THIS? 

 

 

Or this, which is probably more a case of "why?" than "what?"

 

[maico]

55 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

On the subject of locos which defy the wildest imagination, what on Earth is THIS? 

 

 

Or this, which is probably more a case of "why?" than "what?"

 

 

BR 19.10 made by Henschel

 

 

Edited February 24, 2023 by maico

[DenysW]

46 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

Of course Garratts are tank locos! Where are their tenders, if not? Except for South African types with water tenders ...

 

Same goes for Kitsons, although some of THOSE had additional water tenders

To me they are both in a grey area between tank & tender locos. There are NER and GNR locomotives with driven wheels under the tenders (usually capable of being disconnected as speed picks up) and we don't call those tank engines. But for Garratts and Kitson-Meyers we (collectively) often do call them tank engines. Grey area: no-one is definitely right or wrong.

 

Do you class the mistake that was the Erie triplex as a tank engine? Looks very tender-engine to me.

[rockershovel]

58 minutes ago, DenysW said:

To me they are both in a grey area between tank & tender locos. There are NER and GNR locomotives with driven wheels under the tenders (usually capable of being disconnected as speed picks up) and we don't call those tank engines. But for Garratts and Kitson-Meyers we (collectively) often do call them tank engines. Grey area: no-one is definitely right or wrong.

 

Do you class the mistake that was the Erie triplex as a tank engine? Looks very tender-engine to me.

 

I'd class the occasional powered tenders as accessories, since they were not integral to their original locos, were mostly discarded and their original locos continued in service with unpowered tenders. 

 

The central, boiler section of a Garratt isn't a loco in itself; the engines are integral to the whole design and no part can be used alone. They are tank engines, I respectfully submit; although I agree that they are not typically so described. 

 

Kitsons have the whole structure on a single rigid frame and are unquestionably tank engines, after all Fairlies are regarded as tank engines. 

 

Garratt or Kitson equipped with supplementary tenders are T+T, as are locos like the various 0-4-0 and 2-4-0 at the Festiniog. 

 

I'd regard the Triplex types as sui generis, one of those otherwise unclassifiable types like the Engerth semi-articulated tenders. 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2023 by rockershovel

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

On the subject of locos which defy the wildest imagination, what on Earth is THIS? 

 

I believe it's this with no clothes on.

[AlfaZagato]

I'd call triplexes tank locos.   Even if you argue the effects of articulation & tender bodies, the handful of triplexes made only had range similar to tank locos, anyways.

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, maico said:

BR 19.10 made by Henschel

 

Which according to the Web had a separate steam motor for each axle, following the then current practice for electric locomotives.  It appears that the motors are frame mounted and presumably there's a flexible drive to the wheel.  Probably one of those ideas that falls under 'worth a try'.

[rockershovel]

20 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

I believe it's this with no clothes on.

I don't believe so, counting the bogies. It seems to have two adjacent trailing bogies. 

 

I thought it was probably something of that sort and either American or German 

[rockershovel]

14 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Which according to the Web had a separate steam motor for each axle, following the then current practice for electric locomotives.  It appears that the motors are frame mounted and presumably there's a flexible drive to the wheel.  Probably one of those ideas that falls under 'worth a try'.

More a case of "too late to be worth the effort".