Imaginary Locomotives

[john new]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The NER scheme was only one of several that were killed off by the Great War. The Midland's Lancaster-Heysham-Morecambe experiment was intended to pave the way for a derby - Manchester scheme; I believe the LNWR was looking at Crewe - Carlisle. Then of course both the LB&SC and LSWR schemes south of the river, which were implemented.

The GWR also priced up electrification into the West Country. The jury seems to be out as to whether the exercise was Swindon’s steam wedded team trying to prove sticking with steam was actually cheaper or a serious proposal to assess bringing in electrification.

[PhilJ W]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The NER scheme was only one of several that were killed off by the Great War. The Midland's Lancaster-Heysham-Morecambe experiment was intended to pave the way for a derby - Manchester scheme; I believe the LNWR was looking at Crewe - Carlisle. Then of course both the LB&SC and LSWR schemes south of the river, which were implemented.

The LB&SC scheme (overhead AC) was arguably superior to the LSWR third rail system. It was killed off because of its German origin.

[PhilJ W]

58 minutes ago, john new said:

The GWR also priced up electrification into the West Country. The jury seems to be out as to whether the exercise was Swindon’s steam wedded team trying to prove sticking with steam was actually cheaper or a serious proposal to assess bringing in electrification.

The reason the GWR looked into electrification (and diesel propulsion) was the need to deliver the coal fuel to the western reaches of the system. It had to travel further from the Welsh coalfields to Penzance than it did to London.

[Hroth]

On 12/06/2022 at 14:42, Compound2632 said:

Atbara tank:

 

 

Bit of a crude lash-up, i'm afraid. It's unfortunate that the driving axle bearing springs have disappeared inside the side tanks...

 

But at least you can get at the smokebox.

 

Almost as eyewatering as my "Stretched Atbara" 4-6-0!

 

Same photo too......

 

Found it!!!

 

 

I think it may have been lost in the Great Migration, I'll look to see if I have it to hand locally...

 

 

Edited June 22, 2022 by Hroth

[rodent279]

12 hours ago, john new said:

As it was then, the obvious answer to problematic steam working is electrification. IIRC the St Clare tunnel in the USA an early example, Raven’s ideas on the NER, the tube network (albeit fumes there rather than haulage issues) and before WW2 delayed it the LNER’s answer to Worsbrough Bank and then onwards via Woodhead was 1500v electrification. Slightly tongue in cheek but the steam engine era was the odd intrusion between the horse and electrification, surprisingly long lived given how early in date pioneer electrics were being trialled.

 

Stephenson himself is supposed to have remarked that one day, railways will be worked by electricity.

Edited June 23, 2022 by rodent279

[MikeOxon]

18 hours ago, john new said:

The GWR also priced up electrification into the West Country. The jury seems to be out as to whether the exercise was Swindon’s steam wedded team trying to prove sticking with steam was actually cheaper or a serious proposal to assess bringing in electrification.

Way back in this thread, (February 24, 2014) I wrote about the proposal that William Dean should explore the possibility of using electric traction in the Severn Tunnel.  In fact, Dean built his 4-6-0, nicknamed the 'crocodile', so I named

my imaginary locomotive the 'electric crocodile'

 

Mike

Edited June 23, 2022 by MikeOxon

[Ben Alder]

Another exploration down the what if the 2-6-2 had been adopted more in the UK - a stretched Ivatt/ BR 2-6-0 with a BR Class 3 type boiler, designed for some of the meandering ScR routes. I can just about justify this one, as both the HR and LMS had planned light 4-6-0's for these lines - here is the HR thoughts on it , which my one is almost exactly a dimensional copy.

 

And a couple of looks at the loco.

 

[whart57]

When it opened as the Rother Valley Railway in 1899 the K&ESR bought two 2-4-0T tank engines. As delivered they had 3'3" drivers. At some time in the 1900s, one of these two locos, Tenderden, was re-wheeled with 4' drivers. The same frames were used so the whole footplate and above was jacked up 4½" making Tenderden look a bit strange.

 

This was the original, though this pic is actually of the other loco, Northiam, which was not modified

 

 

What though if one of these 2-4-0Ts had 4' drivers right from the start.

 

[Guest Simon A.C. Martin]

On 31/05/2022 at 04:05, Pandora said:

Bert Spencer, was a key player in the corrective redesign work of the A1, Gresley and Spencer maintained   a strong life-long professional relationship, poor Spencer had a rough time by Edward Thompson  following the death  of Gresley  

 

If I may be so bold: this has been proven to be completely untrue. Tim Hillier-Graves book on Thompson has corrected this record by having had access to Spencer's archive.

 

Thompson was - in fact - very decent to Spencer and it turns out Spencer had a much closer role with Thompson on the LNER throughout the second world war and thereafter.

 

We need to nip in the bud some of these more dramatic myths around our locomotive heroes (and in Thompson's case, perceived villains), because we are perpetuating untruths that will rattle on without evidence or reasonable investigation.

 

I apologise if this seems brusque, but the personal asides to Thompson that pervade across the internet are always exasperating to see - particularly when there's next to no evidence for them, and plenty of primary evidence against them.

[tythatguy1312]

On 29/06/2022 at 11:24, Simon A.C. Martin said:

I apologise if this seems brusque

oh this is nothing in terms of bluntness compared to my own defences of Thompson, which contained as much swearing as I felt necessary and no less.

[sir douglas]

im surprised you didnt mention your video with Corbs

 

 

[cctransuk]

On 29/06/2022 at 11:24, Simon A.C. Martin said:

 

If I may be so bold: this has been proven to be completely untrue. Tim Hillier-Graves book on Thompson has corrected this record by having had access to Spencer's archive.

 

Thompson was - in fact - very decent to Spencer and it turns out Spencer had a much closer role with Thompson on the LNER throughout the second world war and thereafter.

 

We need to nip in the bud some of these more dramatic myths around our locomotive heroes (and in Thompson's case, perceived villains), because we are perpetuating untruths that will rattle on without evidence or reasonable investigation.

 

I apologise if this seems brusque, but the personal asides to Thompson that pervade across the internet are always exasperating to see - particularly when there's next to no evidence for them, and plenty of primary evidence against them.

 

Might this tedious back-and-forth exchange of rebuttals be better conducted via PM?

 

The combatants clearly hold deeply entrenched opinions, and continual public engagements merely clog up an otherwise interesting thread.

 

Let's face it, the subject is of no relevance in today's increasingly fraught times.

 

CJI.

[Compound2632]

37 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Might this tedious back-and-forth exchange of rebuttals be better conducted via PM?

 

 

If it was merely a private argument, the rest of us would not be able to draw conclusions from it. I am all in favour of the enthusiasts' folklore and mythology being exposed for the fantasy it often is in a public forum. There is far too much of such stuff polluting public discourse; in my hobby, I'd like to be free of it for a while! So I welcome any challenge to the fake news of received opinions.

[eldomtom2]

That's as may be, but from past experiences with Simon I'd trust the claims he's making far more from anyone else...

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, eldomtom2 said:

That's as may be, but from past experiences with Simon I'd trust the claims he's making far more from anyone else...

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I've found his recent contributions on the Wright Writes thread a breath of fresh air. 

[JimC]

51 minutes ago, eldomtom2 said:

I am not entirely sure what the forum rules allow you to say about another person, but

I trust the forum rules don't allow that. Quite unnecessary.

[eldomtom2]

2 hours ago, JimC said:

I trust the forum rules don't allow that. Quite unnecessary.

Frankly I am deeply disappointed to discover that the moderation on these site appears to consider the slightest degree of criticism of the character of another member beyond the pale. I do not think it is a healthy attitude to cultivate.

[Guest Simon A.C. Martin]

13 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Might this tedious back-and-forth exchange of rebuttals be better conducted via PM?

 

The combatants clearly hold deeply entrenched opinions, and continual public engagements merely clog up an otherwise interesting thread.

 

Let's face it, the subject is of no relevance in today's increasingly fraught times.

 

CJI.

 

The only people who find it tedious are those who would prefer it if the status quo of railway history was preserved in the name of saving the face of a few writers and time keepers.

 

The subject is of direct relevance to a world in which propaganda and "post truth" discussion is rife.

 

Evidence based approaches should be encouraged, not discouraged just because you'd prefer the pantomime villain story over the truth.

[Guest Simon A.C. Martin]

7 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I've found his recent contributions on the Wright Writes thread a breath of fresh air. 

 

I'd just like to thank you for the support. I will bow out here - but for anyone who is interested in the research, please feel free to drop me a line directly.

[cctransuk]

10 hours ago, Simon A.C. Martin said:

 

The only people who find it tedious are those who would prefer it if the status quo of railway history was preserved in the name of saving the face of a few writers and time keepers.

 

The subject is of direct relevance to a world in which propaganda and "post truth" discussion is rife.

 

Evidence based approaches should be encouraged, not discouraged just because you'd prefer the pantomime villain story over the truth.

 

My final post too - I haven't the slightest interest in anything related to East Coast railway traction, nor in the reputed or recorded merits of two deceased locomotive engineers.

 

Even if the truth could be indisputably determined, it would make not one iota of difference to the current condition of our ill-used planet.

 

CJI.

[whart57]

On 03/07/2022 at 10:27, cctransuk said:

Let's face it, the subject is of no relevance in today's increasingly fraught times.

 

 

Who is Edward Thompson? (Asking for a friend)   

[Northmoor]

37 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

My final post too - I haven't the slightest interest in anything related to East Coast railway traction, nor in the reputed or recorded merits of two deceased locomotive engineers.

 

Even if the truth could be indisputably determined, it would make not one iota of difference to the current condition of our ill-used planet.

 

CJI.

Well if that's the criteria for worthwhile discussion, RMWeb can be closed today and we can all cease any interest in model railways.

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

Well if that's the criteria for worthwhile discussion, RMWeb can be closed today and we can all cease any interest in model railways.

 

OK - I'll bite!

 

I am an avid enthusiast of CONSTRUCTIVE discussion; I see no point in ENTRENCHED combatants firing their stale opinions at each other, when there is not the slightest possibility of them being swayed by their opponents' salvos.

 

CJI.

Edited July 4, 2022 by cctransuk

[DenysW]

I was puzzled as to the relevance to imaginary locomotives, especially much the same was being thrashed out on Wright Writes, where, as a home for LNER and BR(E) debates it felt more at home.

[Flying Pig]

[Comment deleted - unnecessarily provocative FP]

Edited July 4, 2022 by Flying Pig