Wright writes.....

[t-b-g]

According to the results of the wind tunnel tests, an A4 travelling at 100mph, running into a headwind of 50mph, saved approximately 640 hp by being streamlined.

 

OK, that scenario didn't happen much and at slower speeds the saving was less, until at about 60mph it was very little indeed but hardly just a publicity stunt.

 

The Gresley design was thoroughly tested before production commenced, including in wind tunnels. I am sure that if there was no benefit in performance, he wouldn't have gone ahead with the class just for publicity purposes.

 

Having said that, design and marketing must have played a part in the choice of livery and the decision to introduce a fast, streamlined service in the first place.  

 

What we tend to forget after all these years and with all the advances in design is just how much impact the A4s had when they were introduced. Not just in railway circles either. My father in law is nearly 90 and doesn't know what day it is but he has vivid memories of being taken to the local station in 1935 to watch this silver and grey train tear through, accelerating off the speed restricted viaduct and going faster than anything they had ever seen before. It must have seemed like something from another planet to them, compared to the Ivatt Atlantics and A1/A3s they were used to.

[The Johnster]

'Sir Nigel designed the mighty A4, with the speed of a greyhound and the strength of a boar'.

 

The New York Central's 1941 '20th Century Limited' was timed to run at 100mph with a 1,000 ton trailing load, probably the most ambitious timetable ever undertaken anywhere and well beyond anything done with a single locomotive today.  The 'Niagara' class 4-8-4s were used, significantly relying for performance on 7 foot driving wheels and intensive maintenance including fire cleaning en route by men in asbestos suits, rather than streamlining.  They were 'normal' looking big engines with very large smoke deflectors, sadly all scrapped but the Union Pacific's 844 is still in service and is a broadly similar looking engine, also capable I believe of very fast running.  A timetable requiring reliable day to day running of 100mph suggests a loco capable of 120.

 

The visual impact of an A4, especially with the silver or blue/cream trains to match, must have been remarkable, and probably nothing touched the public's imagination in the same way until the advent of HSTs, accompanied by an effective advertising campaign on tv.  They were a publicist's dream, but the real secret was in the development of the already good A3 and in the internal layout of the machine, and nothing to do with how it looked.  Of course they accelerated off the viaduct with only 8 on, an A3 could have done that, but without the visual impact.

Edited February 9, 2017 by The Johnster

[The Johnster]

G'day Gents

 

Thought I'd post a picture of a SAR class 520, with streamlining, they didn't need the streamlining, but they look good.

 

manna (AKA Terry)

 

I want to know what a Pennsy T4 was doing 9 months before that was born...

[Guest Brighton_JunctionLNER]

Hey Tony Afternoon Tony,

have you started on that NSWGR locomotive yet? 

Jesse 

ps hows the old? Going to reach 45 here on the weekend *cries*

[Bernard Lamb]

I have always had a liking for these. A sort of a cross between an A4 and a Coronation.

Stephenson's PC Class for Iraqui.

Bernard

[Chimer]

Bulleid Q1. The ultimate in austerity design at the time I believe.

I might not have A4s in my top 5 loco's I really think are beautiful, however their whistles, oh those whistles, especially when Doppler is engaged. Goose bumps. That sound is almost as good as a Bulleid Pacific whistle.

Sadly the A3 whistle wasn't that wonderful if Scotsman's is anything to go by.

A. Chimer. 

 

Oi!  

[Focalplane]

Streamlining was a phase during the 1930s which seems to have been influenced by 20th Century art - Art Deco, Bauhaus, etc. and by the desire by railway/road companies to give the impression of speed to a public being courted by early passenger 'planes.  In the case of some named trains the speed was certainly there, as noted in several posts above.

 

But in others the streamlining really wasn't all that effective.  Here's a good example:

 

 

The Sunbeam ran between Houston and Dallas from 1937 to 1954 and was influenced by the success of the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daylight.  While the Daylight could and did run at high speed (85 mph plus) over parts of its route the Sunbeam's track was only capable of giving a mile and minute end to end timing over its 265 mile route which had few gradients.  So the streamlined casing of the three Class P-14 pacifics was actually not going to make the Sunbeam go any faster except in the imagination.  The typical poster of the day was almost universal at the time - not too different from LNER advertising!

 

The airlines won out in the end.

 

(Note: the print is in the public domain)

[St Enodoc]

That's nice Terry. For my earlier post I couldn't find a picture that wasn't copyright. I like the one in the museum at Port Adelaide, not so much for the shape as for the glorious black/white/stainless steel art deco livery. The NSGWR 38 class are interesting too.

Here's 523 "Essington Lewis" at the National Railway Museum in Port Adelaide.

 

Peering into the cab is none other than Barry O of this parish. The photo was taken during the Leeds Model Railway Society Eating and Drinking Section Australian Branch Meeting in March 2014.

 

This is NSWGR 3801 at Robertson in the Southern Highlands in September 2007, before it was withdrawn for what has turned out to be a rather protracted overhaul. To my eyes there is quite a resemblance to the "Sunbeam" shown in Paul's post above.

[APOLLO]

Southern Pacific ? - You can't beat a good old Mexborough Pacific - clink clank clink clank !!

 

 

Brit15

 

[chris p bacon]

20140315 022 523 at National Railway Museum.JPG

Peering into the cab is none other than Barry O of this parish. 

Can I cab it mister.........

[Mallard60022]

Southern Pacific ? - You can't beat a good old Mexborough Pacific - clink clank clink clank !!

 

DSCF0056.jpg

 

Brit15

I've always liked WDs; can't explain why. Oh, what I would give to have one of those go clanking through 36E on a coal to one of the Power Stations and then listen to it tackling Clarborough Bank.

Ordinary but wonderful (bit like me really).

Philth 

[manna]

G'day Gents

 

Here's another of 526, I took it on the same day on the out skirts of Adelaide, winter of 1969 ( May - Oct )

 

manna

[glo41f]

So a passing comment on A4s yields a rich trawl on streamlining with some wonderful pictures of locos two of which I had no knowledge of in any way. What a learned lot you are. The WD class were a common sight around these parts and used to display an alarming gait as they seemed to waddle as each cylinder took the load. I gather from retired footplate staff that things could get quite lively at times. Now if one of outr models displayed the same characteristics we would be rushing it off to our Leader for attention at one of his show demonstrations.

 

The late North Devonshire railway used track that was laid on foam rubber thus giving a slightly sprung effect. Frank Dyer was minded the other way advocating a firm base for track to facilitate good pick up. I am about to lay some track on a small project layout and I wonder what the current received wisdom is. I do not have sprung locos but I do want to eliminate traction noise reverberating through the baseboard as far as I am able. I am minded to use cork for underlay but will be persuaded otherwise by learned folk who lurk herein.

 

Martin Long

[Tony Wright]

Hey Tony Afternoon Tony,

 

have you started on that NSWGR locomotive yet? 

 

Jesse 

 

ps hows the old? Going to reach 45 here on the weekend *cries*

No Jessie, but I will. 

 

I've been finishing off some locos I built some little time ago, which Geoff Haynes has painted for me. 

 

 

 

Including this V2, which I built using a Graeme King resin body on top of a Comet chassis, and towing a Bachmann tender. It's slightly anomalous with LB, having a Kylchap double chimney but I like it. 

 

 

CLUMBER is (almost) complete as well (I've just got to line the cylinders). A March-allocated B17 is also anomalous at LB as well, though 61620 has a place of special affection in my memory. I first saw her 60 years ago, rushing through Kiveton Park on the boat train. I'm returning soon to South Anston (very near to Kiveton Park), for the funeral of a very dear aunt (she made 96!). Will I look at the station? I doubt it. 

 

With regard to model B17s, one might ask why bother to build one? Some simple back-of-fag-packet calculations make 'astonishing' comparisons. Hattons have been selling Hornby B17s for less than £80.00 (is this right?), complete and RTR. The cost of this Crownline kit is around £130, plus wheels (at over £12.00 per axle for Markits drivers) and near £50.00 for a motor/gearbox. Then there's the painting (which I sort of could have done, but nowhere near as well), not to mention the time in constructing it - pleasurable time, to be fair. So, building a B17 doesn't stack up from a fiscal point of view. However, as I said in the MRJ 'so what!' You don't have to be a railway modeller to buy/own a Hornby B17; you could well be, but you don't need to be. As I've said many times, building things to me is far more important than possessing them, even if, in the crucial analysis, they might not be any better - or even worse. 

 

 

 

As for an RTR H16, I think anyone can forget that (but, who knows?) Geoff has painted this perfectly, reflecting a well-used workhorse. 

 

No streamlining of any kind here!

 

Edited to apologise for yet another picture cock-up!!!!!!!!!

Edited February 9, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

So a passing comment on A4s yields a rich trawl on streamlining with some wonderful pictures of locos two of which I had no knowledge of in any way. What a learned lot you are. The WD class were a common sight around these parts and used to display an alarming gait as they seemed to waddle as each cylinder took the load. I gather from retired footplate staff that things could get quite lively at times. Now if one of outr models displayed the same characteristics we would be rushing it off to our Leader for attention at one of his show demonstrations.

 

The late North Devonshire railway used track that was laid on foam rubber thus giving a slightly sprung effect. Frank Dyer was minded the other way advocating a firm base for track to facilitate good pick up. I am about to lay some track on a small project layout and I wonder what the current received wisdom is. I do not have sprung locos but I do want to eliminate traction noise reverberating through the baseboard as far as I am able. I am minded to use cork for underlay but will be persuaded otherwise by learned folk who lurk herein.

 

Martin Long

Martin,

 

Norman Solomon lays his track on foam, which tends to deaden any drumming noise. It's not absolutely quiet (but neither is a real railway) and it has a little 'give', which might aid good pick-up. 

 

I did promise to post some pictures of my Brits - so, here they are. 

 

 

As mentioned, this is a DJH kit, built mainly by Bob Alderman, completed by me and painted by Ian Rathbone. I should have made sure the boiler handrails were more parallel with the footplate, and the whistle's been pushed down. It doesn't half go, though. 

 

 

This is a current Hornby Brit which I've modified/detailed/renumbered/renamed. My elder son, Tom, did the weathering. I must really replace the smoke deflectors and that (horrid) chimney. Hornby motors were mentioned recently, and taking this picture reminded me that this one just conked out. It's not been run much, but it made a grinding noise and then just 'died'. It's got a new motor now, and goes all right but it's not as powerful as the DJH one. Decent Markits bogie wheels were substituted for the poor Hornby ones. 

 

 

This is an older Hornby tender-drive Brit. I chucked out the tender drive (actually, I gave it away), fitted a complete Comet set of loco/tender frames and packed the body with lead. I fitted etched-brass deflectors, renumbered/renamed/detailed/weathered it, and that's that. 

[Poggy1165]

Streamlining was definitely a 1930s fashion statement. Manchester even had streamlined buses - allegedly. In reality, a special livery that gave emphasis to the curves. Looked at through impartial eyes, the buses were about as streamlined as a tin of corned beef. But I would guess Mr R. Stuart Pilcher's idea was to make them look modern, compared to the trams that he was obsessed with scrapping. The paint style certainly had no practical effect.

 

Your average LNER train was even less modern than a Manchester tram. But the A4s and the relatively few high-speed expresses they provided must have been a publicist's dream, and a useful cloak for the reality that the LNER was practically a working museum. 

[Willie Whizz]

...

 

With regard to model B17s, one might ask why bother to build one? Some simple back-of-fag-packet calculations make 'astonishing' comparisons. Hattons have been selling Hornby B17s for less than £80.00 (is this right?), complete and RTR. The cost of this Crownline kit is around £130, plus wheels (at over £12.00 per axle for Markits drivers) and near £50.00 for a motor/gearbox. Then there's the painting (which I sort of could have done, but nowhere near as well), not to mention the time in constructing it - pleasurable time, to be fair. So, building a B17 doesn't stack up from a fiscal point of view. However, as I said in the MRJ 'so what!' You don't have to be a railway modeller to buy/own a Hornby B17; you could well be, but you don't need to be. As I've said many times, building things to me is far more important than possessing them, even if, in the crucial analysis, they might not be any better - or even worse. 

 

...

 

 

Hell's teeth, if a B17 is 'mission critical' to our layouts, at that price (and especially by comparison) for many of us it would almost makes sense to buy two Hornbys ... storing one away carefully for the inevitable time the first one breaks beyond our simplistic capability to repair, and/or to get the spare parts by then.

 

Or is that just a counsel of despair over the fact that these days my age seems to be advancing faster than my skill?

[Killybegs]

Tony, you can always save yourself a bit of money by attacking the Brit chimney with needle files as below:

 

[Tony Wright]

Hell's teeth, if a B17 is 'mission critical' to our layouts, at that price (and especially by comparison) for many of us it would almost makes sense to buy two Hornbys ... storing one away carefully for the inevitable time the first one breaks beyond our simplistic capability to repair, and/or to get the spare parts by then.

 

Or is that just a counsel of despair over the fact that these days my age seems to be advancing faster than my skill?

Willie,

 

In many ways I entirely agree. If B17s are needed for an OO layout, then buying two (or three) Hornby ones makes much more sense. Change the bogie wheels, change the number/name, weather them, add real coal, fit a crew and lamps, and there you go. If you (the generic 'you') can't do it, then pay someone else to do it for you, or leave them as they are. However, I know exactly what's gone into mine, I can predict (with confidence, not arrogance) that mine will pull more, last longer and be 'mine' in a way impossible with an RTR loco made in some distant factory.

 

But then, I don't have much money-sense! And, it's certainly no better-looking.

 

As for 'age', I'm reminded of the saying 'The older I get, the better I was!'

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited February 9, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Tony, you can always save yourself a bit of money by attacking the Brit chimney with needle files as below:

 

70018.84.jpg

Thanks John,

 

I've got a brass chimney which should do the job. 

[GreenGiraffe22]

Love that H16, excellent livery choice too.

[Headstock]

No Jessie, but I will. 

 

I've been finishing off some locos I built some little time ago, which Geoff Haynes has painted for me. 

 

60858 01.jpg

 

60858 02.jpg

 

Including this V2, which I built using a Graeme King resin body on top of a Comet chassis, and towing a Bachmann tender. It's slightly anomalous with LB, having a Kylchap double chimney but I like it. 

 

61620 01.jpg

 

CLUMBER is (almost) complete as well (I've just got to line the cylinders). A March-allocated B17 is also anomalous at LB as well, though 61620 has a place of special affection in my memory. I first saw her 60 years ago, rushing through Kiveton Park on the boat train. I'm returning soon to South Anston (very near to Kiveton Park), for the funeral of a very dear aunt (she made 96!). Will I look at the station? I doubt it. 

 

With regard to model B17s, one might ask why bother to build one? Some simple back-of-fag-packet calculations make 'astonishing' comparisons. Hattons have been selling Hornby B17s for less than £80.00 (is this right?), complete and RTR. The cost of this Crownline kit is around £130, plus wheels (at over £12.00 per axle for Markits drivers) and near £50.00 for a motor/gearbox. Then there's the painting (which I sort of could have done, but nowhere near as well), not to mention the time in constructing it - pleasurable time, to be fair. So, building a B17 doesn't stack up from a fiscal point of view. However, as I said in the MRJ 'so what!' You don't have to be a railway modeller to buy/own a Hornby B17; you could well be, but you don't need to be. As I've said many times, building things to me is far more important than possessing them, even if, in the crucial analysis, they might not be any better - or even worse. 

 

H16 19.jpg

 

H16 20.jpg

 

As for an RTR H16, I think anyone can forget that (but, who knows?) Geoff has painted this perfectly, reflecting a well-used workhorse. 

 

No streamlining of any kind here!

 

Edited to apologise for yet another picture cock-up!!!!!!!!!

 

Tony,

 

some smashing builds there, your valve gear is far better than any of the RTR equivalents. The chimney on the RTR Brittania is almost as horrific as the streamlined locomotives I have just Googled. Clearly, the A4's were the most handsome looking of the lot.

 

It has been mentioned that you could buy two Hornby B17's for the price of a kit built example. Pesumably, you would require them both coupled together to pull the excellently observed trains running on LB.

 

 Finally, I have just picked up the copy of MRJ with your article in it, I shall look forwards to reading it later. A cursory glance reveals the shot of the J6 up on the embankment, it looks very effective.

[New Haven Neil]

The New Haven had a streamlined class too, the I5.  Similar in looks to the Aussie 38.

 

[APOLLO]

Very nice Brits Tony. Although 70015 Apollo was my favourite, second was 70036 Boadicea (spelled properly - where ever did this Boudica name come from ?).

 

Back in 1963 after passing my 11+ exam my parents treated me to a Tri-ang TT gauge 70036 - the new model with see through wheels and smoke. Lovely loco, pride of my TT fleet over the years and I still have her carefully wrapped in tissue in her original yellow box. I've no TT layout now but she still runs OK. This old Tri-ang stuff lasts for ever !!

 

Oh for a mucky un-named brit storming north out of Wigan.

 

 

Brit15

Edited February 9, 2017 by APOLLO

[Clive Mortimore]

All this talk of streamlined locos, how about the Chemins de Fer Algériens (Algerian Railways) Streamlined Garratt http://www.dieselpunks.org/profiles/blogs/sunday-streamline-67-algerian-garratts