Wright writes.....

[APOLLO]

It's well known that over in the USA the Union Pacific ran a range of very successful gas turbine locos for a quite number of years. Ran on Bunker C (low grade high ash) oil and later on Propane.

Three types were built.

 

 

They ran with Big Boys - what a sight this would have been !!

 

 

 

 

This is where and why they excelled, long heavy trains, long distances at constant speeds across the high plains of Wyoming, they also did well crossing the Rockies over Sherman Hill.

 

 

Very nice painting. Bit higher than Ais Gill but similarly a double track fast route over the hills.

 

 

What is not well known is their home brewed GTEL Coal Burning turbine loco. A bit of a beast cobbled together with anything available at the time.

 

 

The story is here   https://locomotive.fandom.com/wiki/Union_Pacific_GTEL_Coal_Burner

Plagued with problems it didn't last long.

 

What a time to be a "Railfan" over there in the 50's & 60's !!

 

Brit15

Edited October 15, 2023 by APOLLO
additional info

[Mike 84C]

Looks like the bunker C got everywhere! dirtier than coal.  The oil slick down the side of 29 is pretty impressive, I wonder what disaster caused it?

[Clive Mortimore]

6 hours ago, Barry O said:

The M1 tank is very, very fuel thirsty generating a logistical nightmare. It is also a very easily identifiable thermal target. A normal diesel powered Challenger 1 or 2 covers double the distance with full fuel tanks than an M1 can. Yes it's quick..but the ride is horrendous.. its very loud and very thirsty.

 

We did have a lycoming GT601 fitted Chieftain for trials.. it wasn't powerful enough, the Russians trialled a T series tank with GT fitted.. they went back to diesel in further production runs..

 

Baz

Wot? not as powerful as a Leyland L60. Most L60 engines done more miles being transported in the back of a REME FV434 than they did inside a tank.

 

As for steam turbines sounding like gas turbines, I can't recall those in the power stations I worked in as an apprentice ever being fitted with after burners.

[Barry O]

31 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Wot? not as powerful as a Leyland L60. Most L60 engines done more miles being transported in the back of a REME FV434 than they did inside a tank.

 

Yep.. it was as much use as a chocolate fire guard..

 

Baz

[lezz01]

On the whole I would say that most of the pack type of engines used by the British military were very poor back in the 80s. We had two 432s in my command post section and it was a struggle to get through 2 tactical exercises with out a breakdown in the field requiring a pack change from one or both. 

Regards Lez.

[APOLLO]

Although the UP GTEL's (Gas turbine electric locos) were very successful, they eventually gave way to diesels in the late 60's. 

 

No show without Punch as they say, The N&W coal burning steam turbine electric loco was nicknamed "Jawn Henry" after the legend of John Henry, a rock driller who famously raced against a steam drill and won, only to die immediately after.

 

The loco, built in 1954 lasted only until 1958, apparently steam, coal dust and electric traction motors didn't mix.

 

 

 

In coal train "Pusher" service here. Note the "doghouse" on the tender top for the head end brakeman (when pulling a train) - what a job I bet that was !!.

 

 

The Chesapeake & Ohio built three of these colourful M1 coal fired steam turbine electric locos in 1948. Defying the usual convention, the M-1 was arranged with its boiler in the rear and the coal bunker in the front. At the time of its construction it was the longest single-unit locomotive in the world. M-1s themselves proved expensive to operate and mechanically unreliable. Not including research and development, the three locomotives cost US$1.6 million. All scrapped by 1950.

 

 

As mentioned earlier Turbines (especially coal fired) are perhaps not suited for Railway work. Best used in airplanes, ships and gas transmission pipeline compressor stations.

 

Well, at least they tried !!

 

Brit15

[cctransuk]

12 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Turbines (especially coal fired) are perhaps not suited for Railway work. Best used in airplanes .......

 

I'd love to see a coal-fired turbine aircraft - the stoker's role would be 'interesting'!

 

CJI.

Edited October 15, 2023 by cctransuk

[APOLLO]

47 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

I'd love to see a coal-fired turbine aircraft - the stoker's role would be 'interesting'!

 

CJI.

 

 

 

https://hushkit.net/2019/03/29/the-lippisch-p-13-supersonic-wonder-plane-or-nazi-coke-head-an-assessment-by-former-british-technical-liaison/

 

Brit15

 

 

Edited October 15, 2023 by APOLLO

[Pebbles]

50 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

I'd love to see a coal-fired turbine aircraft - the stoker's role would be 'interesting'!

 

CJI.

I have an idea that Sir George Cayley toyed with the idea of an aircraft powered by a  light weight steam engine. His ideas for a "Gunpowder Engine" are better known. 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Pebbles

[LNER4479]

Meanwhile, back in the world of railway modelling ...

 

 

 

City of London strutting her stuff at the Hornby GETS show this weekend. Thought you'd like to see (Tony) that the loco remains in the rudest of health, on her regular working.

[andytrains]

Nice to see model railways back on the agenda!😁

[APOLLO]

1 hour ago, andytrains said:

Nice to see model railways back on the agenda!😁

 

 

Brit15

[46444]

3 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

 

Brit15

 

What could possibly go wrong?...

[DenysW]

9 minutes ago, 46444 said:

What could possibly go wrong?...

Unfortunately that question is inextricably linked in my mind with "What's the worst that could happen?". To which, on modern H&S courses, the only possible answer is Death.

[Tony Wright]

13 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Meanwhile, back in the world of railway modelling ...

 

 

 

City of London strutting her stuff at the Hornby GETS show this weekend. Thought you'd like to see (Tony) that the loco remains in the rudest of health, on her regular working.

Good morning Graham,

 

I take it the show went well?

 

Thanks for showing 46245 (DJH/Wright/Haynes) working well on her flyweight eight-car rake.

 

It's interesting to note the contemporary new trains introduced on the WCML and ECML respectively, 'The Caledonian' and 'The Talisman', both loaded to eight cars (the latter loaded to nine subsequently, and with an extra - afternoon - service a year or two later). 

 

Am I right in thinking that 'The Caledonian' had two ex-LMS cars in its formation - the Kitchen Car and a BFO/BFK? I'm sure your rake is correct, but I can't tell from your first picture.

 

 

In my shot (which I assume shows the same train?), the penultimate vehicle also appears to be ex-LMS (an FO?). Is this correct? 

 

 

I built 46245, of course, to represent her appearance on the ECML in 1963, on a return special from Kings Cross to Doncaster. By all accounts, the run was disappointing, with the hoped-for 'ton' down Stoke Bank nowhere near achieved, so it's best she runs on Shap!

 

At the risk of appearing partisan, I think 'The Talisman' had the more-interesting consist, inasmuch as half the train was made up of ex-LNER cars........

 

 

Including an ex-'Coronation' FO twin, a Thompson FK and RSO, as well as the Mk.1s.

 

 

The same train appears on Retford. 

 

With Hornby's RTR 'Coronation' train in the offing (including the cars in BR condition) then this train will only need the Thompson types to be built (Bachmann/Hornby providing the Mk.1s). 

 

Speaking of Mk.1s.................

 

 

 

The 'Morning Talisman' can be made-up using just Bachmann Mk.1 cars, and be accurate (but not so interesting). 

 

 

On Little Bytham, it's often A4-hauled.

 

When the Bachmann Mk.1 cars first appeared, I made-up 'The Talisman' from them for Stoke Summit.............

 

 

Where it ran for many years, and still runs on Little Bytham.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

[DenysW]

21 hours ago, APOLLO said:

As mentioned earlier Turbines (especially coal fired) are perhaps not suited for Railway work

I believe that Turbomotive (partly) proves this wrong. On a long heavy slog without steep gradients (Euston-Liverpool) it was the equal of its reciprocating sisters (and maybe marginally more efficient in coal/water), and the LMS design team seem to have substantially overcome the "only effective at maximum power output" problem by their steam admission control system.

 

It's also my belief (which I know others do not share) that it was developed because LMS believed that they'd reached about the sensible maximum speed achievable with reciprocating motion. Opening and closing a 7" poppet valve up to 9 times/second 25 million times between services* does not seem to have been a solved problem for the reciprocating engine. So Turbines - if they worked in the real world of dirt, grit, and vibration - must have looked in the 1930s like the way to 125 mph routinely achieved with steam, and putting one over on LNER.

 

The next stage for high speed would have been controlling the blast so that it both worked at low/intermediate speed, and didn't throw burning coals out of the chimney at high speed, an assertion I've heard made about Mallard's record run. Post WWII I don't believe there were the drivers to go faster with steam - and then it was about going cheaper with diesel or electric.

 

Another opinion: as with many things about steam engines, the technology seems to have been good enough as-was for low-speed mineral or goods trains, and only efficiency gains would have seen turbines developed further.

 

*100,000 miles with 80" wheels

[Tony Wright]

Back to modelling.........

 

With reviews of the Turbomotive taking priority, I've now managed to do more on that 'Victory'.........

 

 

Just bodywork detail to complete, then the cylinders and motion. 

 

It should be finished soon!

 

 

[BMS]

Hopefully I attach my pi victory pic as requested. Pi stands for Planet Industries, the manufacturer. With whom I have no connection apart from a well satisfied customer; model, perfomance, sounds.

Edited October 17, 2023 by BMS
Additional - the visible boiler is a tube complete. They have been available in various liveries - this I wanted for a Brecon & Merthyr one.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, BMS said:

Hopefully I attach my pi victory pic as requested.

Many thanks for this.

 

Is it built from the same Agenoria kit? 

 

The example I'm making will be one which the GWR acquired - hence the safety valve bonnet, and riveted tanks. Yours has a riveted smokebox. The picture I was using as a reference has no rivets on its smokebox, but on the tanks and buffer beams.

 

Obviously, some detail variations.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[LNER4479]

8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Graham,

 

I take it the show went well?

 

Thanks for showing 46245 (DJH/Wright/Haynes) working well on her flyweight eight-car rake.

 

Am I right in thinking that 'The Caledonian' had two ex-LMS cars in its formation - the Kitchen Car and a BFO/BFK? I'm sure your rake is correct, but I can't tell from your first picture.

 

Evening Tony,

 

The Hornby (mag) GETS show was an undoubted success in terms of footfall - so much so, that there were car parking and queuing issues on both days (you can read all about such things on the GETS thread in the 'exhibitions' section of the forum).

 

This might give you an idea. This was Sunday morning, not long after the doors opened - it got much busier quite quickly. In the centre of this view you can see the humongous 'Making Tracks' (Pete Waterman) layout, 150ft in length.

 

We were three deep for large parts of both days, which was gratifying. Once a few rolling stock gremlins had been attended to, we were averaging slightly better than a train a minute on the scenic section. I don't think you can improve on that significantly in a show environment.

 

Finally, on the subject of 'budget modelling', picked up this poorly wagon for a few quid. Appears to be a Parkside PC42. I'll let you know how I get on.

[railroadbill]

Bit of advice requested. I've recently dug out a partly finished Nu-Cast kit of an A2/1.  When (if?) this is finished I'll have every type of LNER  pacific available for the layout.  My problem is the cab roof has disappeared.  Now as the A2/1 was a sort of lengthened pacific version of  the V2, the cab is the same (according to the RCTS 2A book).  I can use one of my V2s to trace a template from the roof to make a new roof for the A2/1 etc.  However, I can't find any photos  of an A2/1 looking down and showing the top of the roof.  Normal lineside pics don't show this.  And I haven't got any drawings (have for the other classes).

 

So my query is, does the A2/1 roof have the same ventilator layout as the V2, is it completely the same? 

 

 

[Michael Edge]

10 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

It's interesting to note the contemporary new trains introduced on the WCML and ECML respectively, 'The Caledonian' and 'The Talisman', both loaded to eight cars (the latter loaded to nine subsequently, and with an extra - afternoon - service a year or two later). 

 

Am I right in thinking that 'The Caledonian' had two ex-LMS cars in its formation - the Kitchen Car and a BFO/BFK? I'm sure your rake is correct, but I can't tell from your first picture.

 

Yes, it had an LMS BCK at one end - our Caledonian set on Carlise has a BR catering car though, not an LMS one.

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, railroadbill said:

Bit of advice requested. I've recently dug out a partly finished Nu-Cast kit of an A2/1.  When (if?) this is finished I'll have every type of LNER  pacific available for the layout.  My problem is the cab roof has disappeared.  Now as the A2/1 was a sort of lengthened pacific version of  the V2, the cab is the same (according to the RCTS 2A book).  I can use one of my V2s to trace a template from the roof to make a new roof for the A2/1 etc.  However, I can't find any photos  of an A2/1 looking down and showing the top of the roof.  Normal lineside pics don't show this.  And I haven't got any drawings (have for the other classes).

 

So my query is, does the A2/1 roof have the same ventilator layout as the V2, is it completely the same? 

 

 

Good evening,

 

I'm sure I have an overhead shot of an A2/1 in one of my books (by Eric Treacy) and I'll check the respective Isinglass drawings tomorrow.

 

I see no reason why the cab arrangement should be any different on an A2/1 from that on a V2. 

 

Just a couple of thing to note - for the most of BR days, the Nu-Cast kit doesn't provide the tender for 60507 (which inherited the streamlined non-corridor type from the smashed-up A4 at York during the War) and if you're contemplating 60508, don't forget to remove the steps on the forward footplate, adjacent to the smoke deflectors.

 

Of course, the A2/1s originally had six-wheeled GS tenders and chimney-side 'fin' deflectors (60508 got big deflectors while still attached to a six-wheeled tender). If modelling those, don't forget that at least one had electric lighting driven from a dynamo off the nearside rear bogie wheel. 60508 got the tall lamp brackets to facilitate electric lighting, but it was never fitted. Just four locos, and differences on each one!

 

Ah, those joys of 'accurate' modelling. In the current RM, in answer to a letter of mine, one correspondent thought the number of lubricators on a loco was a 'trivial' detail ( I was describing a roller bearing A1). I thought it fundamental. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[railroadbill]

Thanks for info, Tony.  This kit has been going on for a very long time....

While it came with parts for the 6 wheel tender, I'm doing it in later condition (with lipped chimney) and I have a current Hornby 8 wheel tender chassis, plus a number of  8 wheel tender bodies to choose from...60507 had a tender from an A4 but the others were new ones (according to the RCTS book) so a bit more research there...snap headed rivets?

I do think I've got the right number of lubricators on it though!

 

 **Just noticed you'd already mentioned the streamlined non-corridor tender for 60507!  And thanks for the other detail differences between the 4 locos.

Edited October 16, 2023 by railroadbill

[Darryl Tooley]

There is a well-known photograph by the late Ben Brooksbank, showing the aftermath of the derailment of 60508 at New Southgate in 1948, which resulted in the death of the fireman.

 

As well as the cab roof, it also shows the combination of 4,200 gal tender and full-height smoke deflectors that Tony mentioned.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:New_Southgate_locomotive_derailment_geograph-2261880-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg

 

D