Imaginary Locomotives

[Joseph_Pestell]

Mikado'd a Coronation and a Brit with a P2 front pony and drivers.

 

Despite the green wheels, visually i still think it sits better on the Coronation.

 

Mikados.jpg

 

Very quick and rough, but i've just spotted that the P2 drives the second wheel, so there may be scope to make them 2-4-4-2 Mallets...

 

Both look great. Perhaps the Brit needs a bit more footplate at the front?

Edited January 19, 2019 by Joseph_Pestell

[Satan's Goldfish]

Perhaps in an effort to ease them around the tight corners north of Edinburgh? Four 18¼" cylinders would be about right for such a machine.

Isn't that the original P2 stomping ground anyway?...

 

Suggestions on which class to turn into a 2-4-4-2 then please that I can convert from a Hornby side image.

[scots region]

Isn't that the original P2 stomping ground anyway?...

 

Suggestions on which class to turn into a 2-4-4-2 then please that I can convert from a Hornby side image.

 

To be honest I've always liked the idea of a large parie mallet as an alternative to the 52XX. 

[The Johnster]

That might have solved the problem of tank leakage on the Ebbw Vale route; the curvature flexed the frames and the frames 'worked' the tanks so that the locos were always short of water.

 

You might need the smaller 45xx type cylinders, though, platform clearances will be a problem with the larger ones on a swinging Mallet front bogie; with 4 small ones to do the work of 2 big ones and still increase overall cylinder capacity it eases the demands on the no.4 boiler, which you are limited to for axle loading reasons as we have seen with the proposed King boilered 2-8-2T, and, I imagine, you've still improved the T.E of the 52xx.  We are probably talking 9F here!

 

The GW probably gave up on articulated locomotives after 'Hurricane' and 'Thunderer', though.  Memories were long at Swindon. and uninterrupted by inconveniences like grouping.

Edited January 19, 2019 by The Johnster

[scots region]

 

Speak of the devil, found this on page 119, courtesy of Satans goldfish.

[Satan's Goldfish]

Was about to go look for that. It evolved into a 2-4-6-2t

[Satan's Goldfish]

Like this:

 

Ignore the top 2!

Edited January 19, 2019 by Satan's Goldfish

[RLBH]

Isn't that the original P2 stomping ground anyway?...

 

Suggestions on which class to turn into a 2-4-4-2 then please that I can convert from a Hornby side image.

It is indeed - they had the power for the job but the long wheelbase still caused problems IIRC. So there's the possibility of a 'just supposing' 7th loco being built as a Mallet.

 

Though I do like the idea of a 2-4-4-2T for Ebbw Vale too.

[Satan's Goldfish]

 

Yeah i know i didnt change the number to 2007...

 

Had to stretch the smoke box a little to make it look right. Tried Streamlining it too.

[The Johnster]

Sorry to rain on parades, but I doubt any tank loco with a Castle or No.1 boiler would be acceptable to the Civil Engineer; no.4 boiler is probably the biggest you'll get away with and probably sufficient for Ebbw Vale work.  If we are thinking of an 0-6-6-0 Mallet for banking from Aberbeeg to Ebbw Vale steelworks, you might even be able to get away with no more than a 56xx style tank and bunker arrangement.

 

It is the Ebbw Vale iron ore trains, loaded at Newport Docks and taken 18 miles uphill, the bank getting steeper all the way, that were the impetus to the GW and later WR attempts to draw up big engines of this sort; the 2-10-2T was a serious proposal.  Even Riddles' 9F was not able to load fully to the length of train permitted, and the game of supplying a steelworks and making money out of it depends on the longest, heaviest, and fastest trains you can arrange.  This was the impetus for the triple headed 37s, and later double headed 56's, on the Port Talbot-Llanwern trains; the 60mph capacity and 100 ton wagons were a 60% saving (I was told at the time) over 35ton hoppers or tipplers.

[Satan's Goldfish]

I think that was a Saint boiler... not sure anymore what GWR boiler No. that is or what its axle weight would be (tank engine is 7 axles, tender engine is 6)

[westerner]

Like this:

post-9147-0-11591200-1520249477.jpg

Ignore the top 2!

Gosh they're ugly, not at all GWR.

[melmerby]

Though I do like the idea of a 2-4-4-2T for Ebbw Vale too.

Turn the rear power unit around and have a large firebox between the "engines" a la Kitson Meyer?

Maybe even a 2-4-6-2T or even a 2-4-6-0T?

 

Keith

Edited January 20, 2019 by melmerby

[The Johnster]

I think that was a Saint boiler... not sure anymore what GWR boiler No. that is or what its axle weight would be (tank engine is 7 axles, tender engine is 6)

 

No.1; Saint, Star, Hall, Grange, 28xx/2884 and original 47xx.  All red R.A., but so was the Ebbw Vale line.  Kings were tried on the iron ore trains. and 9Fs were the best actual solution.  

 

The Ebbw Vale iron ore traffic was a fairly unique situation. only the Tyne Dock-Consett being perhaps comparable.  That also demanded specialised equipment and challenged the haulage capacity of the best locos available, but was over a shorter distance and did not have to accommodate passenger traffic on a busy local service as well.  I would commend it's study to those who think the GWR was all about glamorous main line expresses and bucolic branches where everyone chewed grass.  This was brutal work.  

 

The Dowlais iron ore trains to Cae Harris were even more difficult, requiring 3 56xx to get a very small number of loaded wagons up to the terminus, double headed and banked and sometimes a helper mid-train US style, but the total tonnage handled was much less.  Heroic stuff; something like 25 hoppers were the maximum!

[rodent279]

Were there any double Fairlies on standard gauge? How about a double Fairlie style GWR 0-6-2?

[The Johnster]

With the radial wheels beneath the firebox, yes! 

 

There were standard gauge Fairlies, mostly in Latin America, and some very large ones for hauling ships on the Panama Canal.

[Gibbo675]

Turn the rear power unit around and have a large firebox between the "engines" a la Kitson Meyer?

Maybe even a 2-4-6-2T or even a 2-4-6-0T?

 

Keith

Hi Kieth,

 

What you suggest is an early GWR version of what I built on post 3959 a few pages back !

 

A couple of Dapol Prairie tanks and some other spare bits and hey presto we could have a forerunner of the BR Std Kitson-Meyer.

 

Gibbo.

[rodent279]

I wonder why the Fairlie concept wasn't used more widely? It would seem to be a useful solution to branches with heavy trains.

[melmerby]

Hi Kieth,

 

What you suggest is an early GWR version of what I built on post 3959 a few pages back !

 

A couple of Dapol Prairie tanks and some other spare bits and hey presto we could have a forerunner of the BR Std Kitson-Meyer.

 

Gibbo.

Yes that's it.

I was just wondering about a Swindon based effort and what it may have looked like using a standard set of bits.

 

Keith

[Suzie]

Nowhere to store the coal on a Fairlie!

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Not useful enough to overcome its disadvantages compared to a conventional rigid frame locomotive. Coal capacity is a major limitation, and it is more expensive in first cost and  maintenance.

 

Edited to correct several wayward spellings, and to add that of course boring economy and practicality should not be treated as an impediment.

Edited January 20, 2019 by 34theletterbetweenB&D

[rockershovel]

I wonder why the Fairlie concept wasn't used more widely? It would seem to be a useful solution to branches with heavy trains.

I would guess that it was superseded by the Kitson Meyer where a more compact locomotive was required, or special features like rack gear (South America in particular) or by the Beyer Garratt where sheer power was required. Both can have as much fuel and water capacity as required by extending the frames, and both can accommodate boilers which make maximum use of the loading gauge.

 

Meyer types achieved considerable success on narrow gauge lines, especially in Germany and Austria.

 

The Modified Fairlie was in many respects, similar to the Meyer but with the great length of the Garratt. The Golwe mitigated this by placing all the fuel and water at the back. The Union Fairlie mitigated this by pivoting one bogie in Garratt fashion, whilst keeping the bunker fixed (reputedly to accommodate mechanical stoking). None of these variants achieved lasting or widespread success.

Edited January 21, 2019 by rockershovel

[rockershovel]

The mikado is a type that never got a full development and operational try out in the UK. Would be better with bigger wheels, as the 40,000lb theoretical starting TE of the Duchess is already more than adequate for UK train loads. Using the LMS standard 5'6" or even better 6' diameter wheels  - there's room in the frame length - should result in a very effective 2-8-2 with the side effect of looking very handsome too. (Which effectiveness the P2 build(s) underway should demonstrate.)

 

I still believe that Riddles missed a trick on the Britannia/9F. Had he built the 300 as large wheel 2-8-2s I am pretty sure this would have been an even greater success than the 9F, combining the best of both classes for a fast mixed traffic machine effective on any main line turn.

If American experience is any guide, the 2-8-2 and 2-8-4 types seem to have been pretty much the ultimate development of the heavy mixed-traffic steam locomotive, with the 4-6-4 as the ultimate development for high speed, heavy duty work

[The Johnster]

I'd agree with that except that 4-6-4s were well on the way to being replaced by 4-8-4s when dieselisation hit.  4-8-4s represent the ultimate development for fast passenger work where steam lasted a little longer, notably South Africa and China.  No work anywhere in Europe warranted such power, the big German 4-6-4s and French Chapelon 4-8-2s sufficed.

[rodent279]

No photos or drawings, I'm afraid, but here's one for you.

BR decide to build a small fleet of dual voltage locos for inter-regional freight & passenger service between SR & LM regions.

Result-a class 73 devoid of engine, and with a transformer/rectifier installed instead. Single pantograph, 100mph capability, MU gear.

Another - Doncaster is given a free reign in styling it's AC electrics, and the AL5's emerge looking like a lengthened, twin pantograph version of a class 71.