Classified Documentation - An S.160 for OO

[Nova Scotian]

9 hours ago, Philou said:

 

 

I know it's a subject that's been hotly debated on here and elsewhere, but the UK HO boat sailed years ago. It's too late for me to go back as I've far too much kit to even think about changing to any other scale. Anyway, if you think we've a problem with too narrow rails, give a thought to those who do Irish outline - it's worse and even on the continent, those who do Iberian (Portuguese included) or Eastern European, have it just as bad. I'll just live with my incorrect gauge/scale models.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

PS: The only thing that stopped me buying the Roco model at the time wasn't so much it was HO, but as the original was constructed to fit the UK loading gauge, it looked out of place size-wise.

I was actually joking.

 

I model in OO. I do have some HO for s***s and giggles - rule one stuff.

 

But if we're being pendants, the Roco HO will be more accurate than the Rapido, which isn't Rapido's fault, it's the fault of the scale. However, one purchases the scale that fits everything else you run.

Now, someone's going to come along and modify their Rapido to P4 to prove me wrong, and they are far more dedicated to scale than I am!

[adb968008]

The s160  isnt a big machine, it looks small next to a lot of things, not least putting a HO s160 next to a HO BR01.

 

 

 

but with the right 00 wagons, you’d never know..

 

 

 

 

 

 

i’m not wedded to the UK, i’m happy to model HO, as well as OO, so look forwards to a Rapido s160 and will keep both, just as I have both 00 and HO class 66 and s100’s… I will however be looking at performance of both models… generally HO always wins over OO.

Edited August 15, 2023 by adb968008

[CF MRC]

On 11/08/2023 at 11:11, The Stationmaster said:

Having disgraced myself m by managing to have to stop for a blow-up while wielding the shovel (as an invitee) on one on the MHR many years ago I think I might be looking at a bête noire pour moi.  

My father used to guard Ampthill Tunnel on the Midland mainline, during the war (he was in the home guard). He told me that the American engines used to have to stop to make steam before continuing south wards.  
 

Tim

Edited August 16, 2023 by CF MRC

[chris p bacon]

15 minutes ago, CF MRC said:

My father used to guard Ampthill Tunnel on the Midland mainline, during the war (he was in the home guard). He told me that the American engines used to have to stop to make steam before continuing south wards.  
 

Tim

That's probably more to do with the fact that no-one wants to stop anywhere in the vicinity of Luton..

[MPR]

It is often said that British prototypes, with their low running plates, splashers and continuous plate frames are more difficult to model to HO rather than OO - as the key dimension is front face of wheel to front face of wheel  - and RTR with its thicker wheels will always cause issues on the "true-to-scale" gauges.

The S160 looks to be an exception though - I do wonder how difficult it would be to convert to P4 with minimal accommodation in the design. As far as I can tell, the motion support bracket could be an issue, and obviously clearance behind the connecting rod etc, but most of the usual issues will be absent.

[MarkSG]

9 hours ago, adb968008 said:

The s160  isnt a big machine, it looks small next to a lot of things, not least putting a HO s160 next to a HO BR01.

 

The S160 was designed for the British loading gauge, of course, so it will be small compared to many American and European locos. But does it look small compared to an equivalent UK loco?

[Steamport Southport]

10 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

 

The S160 was designed for the British loading gauge, of course, so it will be small compared to many American and European locos. But does it look small compared to an equivalent UK loco?

 

The H0 version does. Compare it to the Bulleid in the picture above. The S160 is closer and still smaller.

 

 

Jason

[Michael Hodgson]

10 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

 

The S160 was designed for the British loading gauge, of course, so it will be small compared to many American and European locos. But does it look small compared to an equivalent UK loco?

I thought it was designed primarily for use on continental railways after the D-Day invasion in order to supply our troops as Allied lines advanced towards Berlin, and that our use of it in UK before then was just a short-term temporary expedient to overcome wartime shortages/losses of domestic locos.  So would it not have made sense to design locos for Berne gauge ?

[Wickham Green too]

Not if there was a prospect of 'helping out' in the UK beforehand - and they'd have been pretty well confined to port of entry if they couldn't even be moved inland pending D-Day .... whenever.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

So would it not have made sense to design locos for Berne gauge ?

That's the right question. I would guess that thought was given to this , and it was realised that the ability to move and store them anywhere on rails in the UK, and as required use them to help move UK freight: before the prompt shipment to mainland Europe once there was a working port, won out.

 

The 'other' major US railway import quickly following victory was the 141R, shipped directly to France and built to SNCF gauge requirements.

[Philou]

18 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

So would it not have made sense to design locos for Berne gauge ?

 

You would have thought so. Nonetheless if I read correctly above, they were used extensively over the UK network albeit for a short time in getting materials ready and in place for D-Day. Some of those stocks would have been well off the mainlines viz: the Golden Valley branch. This branch was built to the absolute minimum in just about everything yet they went down there - so built to the UK loading gauge. Was it not the GC that was built to a more continental standard?

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

@Nova Scotian Ha ha! Well done! I bit :)

Edited August 16, 2023 by Philou
Two replies arrived during my posting. There is a 141R at the Mulhouse Museum - it's huge compared to the UK locos.

[Steamport Southport]

16 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I thought it was designed primarily for use on continental railways after the D-Day invasion in order to supply our troops as Allied lines advanced towards Berlin, and that our use of it in UK before then was just a short-term temporary expedient to overcome wartime shortages/losses of domestic locos.  So would it not have made sense to design locos for Berne gauge ?

 

It was estimated in 1943 that WWII could last another ten years so they were designed for UK use. They had thought that the Japan War could last decades.

 

At the time there was no concrete plans for D Day as the chosen route was via Italy. But Germany had suffered great losses on the Eastern Front so many of the troops had moved from France leaving it an easier target. It was really the Battle Of Kursk that changed everything.

 

 

Jason

[RedgateModels]

Look what I photographed this day in 2007.....

 

[Dunsignalling]

5 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

That's the right question. I would guess that thought was given to this , and it was realised that the ability to move and store them anywhere on rails in the UK, and as required use them to help move UK freight: before the prompt shipment to mainland Europe once there was a working port, won out.

 

The 'other' major US railway import quickly following victory was the 141R, shipped directly to France and built to SNCF gauge requirements.

Unless intended for a specific network (like the 141R) a go-anywhere military loco needs to fit the most restricted loading gauge it might encounter.

Edited August 16, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

It was really the Battle Of Kursk that changed everything.

Far from that alone. The 'problem' of essential transatlantic supply to the UK as the forward base for both support to the USSR and for liberating Europe, and then shipping the liberating invasion force across a seaway, with the immediate consequent need for continuous landing of sufficient supplies 'somehow' without a harbour, was the proven impediment to invading Europe from the West, as the Jubilee operation had determined.

 

Subtle use of intelligence to make the battle of the Atlantic winnable was key; and we shouldn't forget that this was by any measure the longest battle of that war, with a materiel and  casualty list that is both huge and  known to be incomplete. While that was happening a heap of smart ideas were developed and executed to overcome both the logistical nightmare, and to initially deceive and delay the German defence forces from executing a successful defence until a sufficient foothold was established.

[Eddie the dog]

 

---

[The Stationmaster]

On 16/08/2023 at 10:46, Michael Hodgson said:

I thought it was designed primarily for use on continental railways after the D-Day invasion in order to supply our troops as Allied lines advanced towards Berlin, and that our use of it in UK before then was just a short-term temporary expedient to overcome wartime shortages/losses of domestic locos.  So would it not have made sense to design locos for Berne gauge ?

They had to be capable of fitting British Loading Gauge as they had to be kept somewhere in Britain to build up a sufficient stockpile of them plus they then had to moved somewhere to be commissioned then they had to get to a port.  Hence they had to fit British Loading gauge.  But they were available in Britain when power was in short supply as teh build up towards D-Day was going on plus some companies had losrt enegines anyway to the WD for overseas duty.

 

Although 2-8-2 S200s were supplied to Britain under Lend Lease they were used in teh Middle East and never ran in Britain.

Photos suggest they were very likely out of gauge for British domestic use plus they were too long to fit all but a 70f turntable.  They went to Italy (c.50) and Turkey (where ne is preserved in local condition)  after use in the Middle East

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

4 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Although 2-8-2 S200s were supplied to Britain under Lend Lease they were used in the Middle East and never ran in Britain.

Hadn't thought of those. I imagine it would have been possible to land these in the UK at selected ports  and move them to some convenient site for storage thanks to the experience of out of gauge  locomotive production for export activity of the likes of NBL and Beyer-Peacock?

[AlfaZagato]

I'd imagine, to some extent. that export locos built to larger loading gauges would have been shipped KD.  Then, erected in local shops.

 

Also, ports would have to accommodate the given cargo ships.   Admittedly, Liberty ships were designed for versatility.  I'd imagine they'd be able to berth and disembark anywhere that took any quantity of international shipping.

 

On the S.160s, what livery options are there?  USATC black, then preservation?

[5Dublo2]

25 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said:

On the S.160s, what livery options are there?  USATC black, then preservation?

In the UK there are at least 4 Liveries seen in preservation (3 current)
- Black with silver/polished steel lettering and "USA" on the tender

- Grey with white lettering and "Transportation Corps, USA" on the tender

- Lined Dark Red with grey lettering, named "Omaha" and "Transportation Corps, USA" on the tender

- Lined Blue with red underframes and gold  lettering, named Franklin D Roosevelt and "LMR" (Longmoor Military Railway) on the tender

 

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Hadn't thought of those. I imagine it would have been possible to land these in the UK at selected ports  and move them to some convenient site for storage thanks to the experience of out of gauge  locomotive production for export activity of the likes of NBL and Beyer-Peacock?

Maybe but they would appear t have been shipped direct to the Middle East,  And unlike the S160s which were USATC property for a while loaned to the Big Four the S200s were supplied to the UK under Lend-Lease for British military use in the Miiddle East.

 

Thus the S200s had. no reason to come to Britain except possibly to be transhipped from one vessel to another although sounds to have been unlikely.

[Wickham Green too]

24 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

... except possibly to be transhipped from one vessel to another although sounds to have been unlikely.

Passing twice as many U-Boat packs ? .......... yes, unlikely !

[The Stationmaster]

19 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Passing twice as many U-Boat packs ? .......... yes, unlikely !

Depends which way they went - more than one way of getting to Egypt by sea from the USA (although one of them would be a very long trip).

[JSpencer]

On 16/08/2023 at 12:13, Steamport Southport said:

 

It was estimated in 1943 that WWII could last another ten years so they were designed for UK use. They had thought that the Japan War could last decades.

 

At the time there was no concrete plans for D Day as the chosen route was via Italy. But Germany had suffered great losses on the Eastern Front so many of the troops had moved from France leaving it an easier target. It was really the Battle Of Kursk that changed everything.

 

 

Jason

 

Kursk plus the allied bombing campaigns keeping so many useful flak 88s (and their shells) back home protecting the fatherland, plus the shear production and economic capacity of the US and USSR plus the battle of the Atlantic turning greatly to Britain's favour. 

The US produced more warships (and big ones too) within 2 years of war than Japan had produced in the two decades prior to it.

 

One thing though, it does seem that Germany managed to produce more steam locos than the US. A surprise considering how they were gasping to find steel production for tanks. 

 

Loading gauge is an interesting one. All nations made tanks to suit their railway loading gauge. Only US and UK tanks had to fit the UK one.... (until they said "stuff it" with the M26, Centurion and Black Prince).

And as the UK has the smallest loading gauge, that seriously restricted tank size. US gauge was so large, I have seen photos of pairs of Sherman's abrest on their flat cars.

 

The S160s must have indeed looked very small over there....

Edited August 18, 2023 by JSpencer

[TrevorP1]

 

Beginning to get into the realms of OT (like we do 🙂) but as we're here... In researching my Father's war service in Burma I discovered that any voyage which took in the Indian Ocean or the Arabian Sea was also subject to the risk submarine attack from the  U boats of the Kriegsmarine and the Italian Regia Marina.

 

An Italian vessel, Leonardo da Vinci was particularly prolific claiming 19 Allied vessels - including two American cargo ships - before it was finally sunk by the combined efforts of the destroyer Active and frigate Ness. My Father's convoy passed through Leonardo da Vinci's hunting ground but fortunately wasn't spotted.