Prototype for everything corner.

[The Johnster]

On 15/02/2024 at 11:13, DenysW said:

It was also apparent that it's not the head-on air resistance that matters, it's the partially-sideways-on wind that messes around with the trains.

 

The retarding effect of a side wind can be very considerable.  One stormy night around 1972 I worked a down Acton-Radyr Class 8 train of 40 or so empty 21ton House Coal Concentration hoppers to Radyr, relieving an Old Oak guard at Swindon.  Loco was a Hymek, load including the van 300 tons trailing, 50mph, running via Badminton, well within the capacity of a Hymek (less than half the permitted).  Wind was a very gusty and violent southwesterly, hitting over Beaufort 10 in the squalls.

 

One could feel the train being retarded by the force of the wind, with speed being around 30mph but rising to the permitted 50 in the tunnels.  Then we ran through Stoke Gifford and out on to the high curving embankment towards Patchway, the sides of the open hoppers fully exposed to the full weight of the wind.  The train came to a stand about level with where the back of the class 800 depot is now.  I could see the 'mek slipping and Catherine-wheeling sparks as it struggled to get the train into motion.  Short while afterwards I saw the secondman's Bardic coming towards me, presumably with the secondman attached to it (did I mention it was night, and lashing it with rain), back to traffic walking in the cess but one could hardly blame him for taking whatever shelter the lee of the hoppers offered him...

 

I walked forward to meet him, and he told me that the loco was unable to move the train (no sh*t, Sherlock] and that we'd need assistance, probably in rear.   I was a bit concerned about the way the hoppers were rocking about in the crosswind, and that one or more were likely to be blown over into the path of anything on the up main, and went on the signal phone to Bristol Panel, who agreed to stop traffic on the up between Patchway and Stoke Gifford just in case. 

 

And there we stayed, stuck, for about fifty minutes, until the wind eased to a mere hurricanel and we were able to get moving.  The hoppers rocked sideways alarmingly, then came back down on their wheels with a bang, but remained on the rails, though I was glad I'd taken the precaution of informing the Panel of that situation, as I was not by any means certain that the rocking might not foul traffic on the up, never mind being blown over on to it.  We crawled past the up Swansea-Swindon parcels, held at Patchway because the Hymek was past the signal protecting the junction (so we'd stoppe traffic on the up and down Filton reliefs as well), and picked up speed in the cutting and the tunnels, then struggled a bit into the loop at Pilning for exam, which in driving rain was not fun. and ran well enough through the Severn Tunnel and the rest of the way, but the experience was, um, interesting!

 

I reckoned the 'windage' of the empty hoppers was probably almost doubled by the wind bearing on the insides of the wagons on the downwind side, and there may have been a suction effect on the outside of that side as well, and that had the train been loaded we'd have managed to keep moving.  It gave me some insight into the Tay Bridge disaster as well. 

 

The effect of air dragging on the sides of trains is far greater than that of frontal resistance or the sucking effect at the rear, and increases with the length of the train.  This is why high-speed streamlining concetrates on enclosing the motion of steam engines and the undersides of coaches, and limiting/enclosing the gangway gaps; this has the beneficial side effect of wider gangways and trolley catering to all seats.  At speeds between about 90mph and 110mph, front end streamlining is largely a matter of aesthetics, but on steam engines can also assist with smoke lifting (Gresley and Bullied, with some assistance from Bugatti, did much investigation into this, and the A4, P2, Hush-Hush, and Bullied 'air smoothed' cowls were the result.  In each case the motion enclosure was found to not be worth the bother, and the P2/Hush Hush cowls were repaced with A4-style fronts.  The Bullies were rebuilt into a more conventioal form with smoke deflectors, but the reasoning for that move was not entirely to do with the shape on the engines; 'air smoothed' casings were claimed to assist cleaning with carriage washing plant and it was rare to see a really dirty Spam Can; the rebuilds got spectacularly filthy).  The LMS did wind-tunnel tests on the 'Coronation' shape at Derby, and came to the conclusion that the way to go was to enclose the motion, but I get the impression that the upturned bathtub was not as developed as it might have been for headwind resistance; it looked the part, though, especially with the 'speed stripe' liveries.  Impressing the travelling punters was part of the game as well...

 

Above about 110mph, headwind resistance increases exponentially and some streamlining is desirable; we are now exceeding speeds reachable by steam engines in normal service conditions.  As speeds increase, the nose ends of the trains have to be shaped to reduce headwind resistance and to minimise the aerofoil lifting effect, the extreme of this being the Japanese and Chinese 'duck-billed' Shinkansens, not pretty but they don't stay around long enough for that to be a problem...

[LMS2968]

When working opens, there was a difference between loaded and empty. The empties were obviously lighter so acceleration and braking were more rapid. But once you got them moving the empties were slower. As another guard put, 'The wind gets into the wagons and slows them down.' In practice, empties have two front faces moving through the air while loaded have only one. And yes, you could feel the difference.

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

As speeds increase, the nose ends of the trains have to be shaped to reduce headwind resistance and to minimise the aerofoil lifting effect, the extreme of this being the Japanese and Chinese 'duck-billed' Shinkansens, not pretty but they don't stay around long enough for that to be a problem...

The Japanese "Duck Bills" were developed to stop or reduce the effects of the pressure wave at the front when running into and out of tunnels.

There was a demonstration on Japan Railway Journal a few years ago on a scale model with and without the duck bill.

 

There is much less of a problem in Europe at the same speeds, where the tunnel diameters are proportional greater compared with the train cross sectional area.

 

 

[montyburns56]

I suppose it's one solution to the lack of retention tanks....

 

Aberdeen -Mossend Sleeper by Jim Ramsay

 

 

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, montyburns56 said:

I suppose it's one solution to the lack of retention tanks....

 

Aberdeen -Mossend Sleeper by Jim Ramsay

 

 

 

I'm guessing that a particularly virulent curry was on the buffet car menu!

 

CJI.

Edited February 20 by cctransuk

[KeithHC]

Football or Rugby extra with a bit of added refreshment.

 

Keith

[keefer]

Steam depot coaling stage out of action?

Nae bother tae the boys at Perth in 1958, job done!

A temporary measure by Kevin Lane, on Flickr

Edited February 22 by keefer

[iands]

10 hours ago, keefer said:

Steam depot coaling stage out of action?

Nae bother tae the boys at Perth in 1958, job done!

A temporary measure by Kevin Lane, on Flickr

I've given this a 'Like', but feel this is woefully inadequate for such a fantastic photo. 

[Chris M]

11 hours ago, keefer said:

Steam depot coaling stage out of action?

Nae bother tae the boys at Perth in 1958, job done!

A temporary measure by Kevin Lane, on Flickr

Love it!  One can't help feeling there may be a couple of minor heath & safety issues.

[iands]

11 minutes ago, Chris M said:

Love it!  One can't help feeling there may be a couple of minor heath & safety issues.

Agreed, certainly by today's standards anyway. Back then though, especially in that era when people were still getting over WWII, a different mind-set of 'make-do-and-mend' attitude still prevailed (as my Mum frequently told me). Folk saw a problem and found a solution to get around it, rather than finding reasons not to do so. 

[brushman47544]

I can't see anyone in the wagon so how did they get the coal out? Was that big group of staff drawing lots to see which unfortunate had to climb up and shovel? "Can't be me guv, I suffer from vertigo".

[BluenGreyAnorak]

There is somebody in the wagon - you can only see their bottom half beneath the top flap. A great example of 'needs must' 🙂

[Wickham Green too]

33 minutes ago, brushman47544 said:

I can't see anyone in the wagon ...

If you're looking for a full orange Hi-Viz suit & hard hat you won't see them !

[Ian Smeeton]

I think that I put this one up before,

 

With the caption

 

'Put Twa ton back in the wagon, Shuggie, she's overloaded'

 

Regards

 

Ian

[Compound2632]

On 15/02/2024 at 20:05, john new said:

A Single's unencumbered ability for speed was IIRC why Stirling built No 1 etc. Was he the CME with the (alleged/true?) quote about locomotives with coupled wheels being like a man running with his breeks (trousers) down?

 

On 16/02/2024 at 11:58, 62613 said:

Dugald Drummond, no?

 

On 16/02/2024 at 14:20, Wickham Green too said:

The gentleman whose double singles were - er - rather less successful than his 4-4-0s .... notably his 'Greyhound' T9s.

 

The comparison of a coupled engine too "a laddie ruunin' wi' his breeks doon" is indeed attributed to Patrick Stirling. But he was rather on his own amongst Ayrshire men there, since his own wee brother James built the G&SWR 6 Class 4-4-0s in 1875, I think just pipping Dugald Drummond with his NBR 476 Class - both classes being built to haul the new Anglo-Scottish expresses off the Midland following the opening of the Settle & Carlisle line. Both classes were supremely successful early examples of British 4-4-0s, James' being developed on the SER, notably in the Class F engines which as F1 survived to BR days, while Drummond had hit on a winning formula which he replicated on the Caledonian and on the LSWR - notably the T9s. His wee brother Peter followed suit with equal success on the Highland. Where Drummond deviated from his winning formula, he tended to run into trouble. But his experimental double-singles were founded on the desire to build a more powerful engine - four cylinders with greater total volume than one could get with two - and a boiler generating more steam, by virtue of the larger grate area possible between the uncoupled driving axles - coupling rod length being a technical limitation at the time. Similar considerations were at work with Webb's Teutonics, which were highly successful engines.

 

Were Drummond's double-singles a greater or lesser failure than his 4-6-0s?

[Wickham Green too]

20 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

... Were Drummond's double-singles a greater or lesser failure than his 4-6-0s?

The jury's definitely still out on that one ..... while the 4-2-2-0s managed between 25 & 30 years and outlasted most of the 4-6-0s ( which only achieved between seven & 19 years ) the T14s had lives of 36-40 years - with a little rebuilding along the way.

 

Drummond's first LSWR 4-4-0s intrigue me : the C8s appeared only a year before the T9s but were gone within thirty years whereas many T9s lasted double that - what's more the C8s were outlived by quite a few of Mr.Adams' 4-4-0s !

[Compound2632]

10 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

Drummond's first LSWR 4-4-0s intrigue me : the C8s appeared only a year before the T9s but were gone within thirty years whereas many T9s lasted double that - what's more the C8s were outlived by quite a few of Mr.Adams' 4-4-0s !

 

I read that the C8s shared the same boiler as the M7s, which did not produce enough steam for express passenger work. I don't have figures for grate area or coupled wheelbase but I'm guessing these were a bit bigger on the T9s?

 

The C8s, I read, were copies of his 66 Class, which were very successful engines for Caledonian conditions of the 1890s, so there must have been something different about working conditions on the South Western?

[MattR]

16 hours ago, keefer said:

Steam depot coaling stage out of action?

Nae bother tae the boys at Perth in 1958, job done!

A temporary measure by Kevin Lane, on Flickr

 

Makes me want to get a Coronation and a crane to recreate this on my layout!

[Wickham Green too]

On 23/02/2024 at 12:58, Compound2632 said:

... I don't have figures for grate area or coupled wheelbase but I'm guessing these were a bit bigger on the T9s? ...

                                T9                                  C8                             T3 ( as they're in the news )

Grate Area            24 sq.ft                         20.36 sq.ft                19.75 sq.ft

Coupled wb          10'                                  9'                                9'

 

The C8 boiler was, indeed, identical and interchangeable with the M7 and 700 classes : clearly nothing wrong with it as both of those lasted well - the 700s, like the T9s were worth superheating.

 

[ Drummond's K10 had the same boiler, too, and was essentially a small-wheeled C8 ..... the K10s lasted close to fifty years.]

 

Edited February 24 by Wickham Green too
K10

[Mol_PMB]

Back to prototypes for anything. If you can't decide whether you want to model British or Swiss prototypes...

(I'm not the only one, @Rick_Skateboard )

More views and details here:

https://eisenbahn-amateur.ch/tag/thurgau/

[eastwestdivide]

It seems those two Mk1 adapter/barrier coaches 975972 and 975975 still exist according to departmentals.com. Did they ever carry UIC numbers? I can see ferry tie-down points on them. 

[brushman47544]

7 hours ago, Mol_PMB said:

Back to prototypes for anything. If you can't decide whether you want to model British or Swiss prototypes...

(I'm not the only one, @Rick_Skateboard )

More views and details here:

https://eisenbahn-amateur.ch/tag/thurgau/

 That’s an SNCF UIC-Y coach between the barrier and the loco, so three railways cooperating. Would you see that now?

[Wickham Green too]

12 hours ago, brushman47544 said:

... so three railways cooperating. Would you see that now?

Not in this country you wouldn't !

[Titan]

21 hours ago, Mol_PMB said:

Back to prototypes for anything. If you can't decide whether you want to model British or Swiss prototypes...

(I'm not the only one, @Rick_Skateboard )

More views and details here:

https://eisenbahn-amateur.ch/tag/thurgau/

 

I was involved with this!  Taking the 465's to Vienna for climatic testing. Some time was spent adapting the Translator vehicles so that they could be hauled by continental locomotives.  Previously they had needed a blue star or ETH fitted loco to provide the electricity required to operate the EP brakes on the Networkers. Yes Networkers - I will come to that later - A small generator was fitted to the translators to provide the electrical supply needed instead.  However the French turned their noses up at it so the Networkers had to be run with inoperative brakes, and a long train pipe tied to them with extra vehicles added to the rear for brake force, rendering all the effort we had put in wasted!

 

Now to the "Networkers" bit.  Rather than a single 4 car unit as it appears, they were in fact two halves, one GEC/Alstholm the other BREL/ABB.  This was because only two cars would fit in the chamber at once, and we weren't going to drag 8 cars all the way to Vienna just so we could test 4 of them.  But things were not straightforward.  Although the two builds may have looked the same with a superficial glance, there was hardly a single thing that was the same on either of them. This included the intermediate couplings. One was Dellner, the other was BSI - not the ones you see on the outer ends of units, but a bolt together bar coupler type, which of course were incompatible.  So two adaptors (might have been three to have one as spare) were made and tested at the RTC Derby.  One for the trip, and one so the other 4 cars remaining in the UK could be coupled up and shunted around more easily, and I think a spare just in case.  Similarly the electrical cables needed some adaptors, and some creative ordering from LPA procured parts that could be bolted together to form adaptors.

 

Plenty of other spare parts were loaded in to the Translator vehicles in anticipation of what we might need for the long journey e.g. a full set of brake blocks for the translator vehicles themselves, or anything that we thought we might manage to break during testing e.g. Windscreen wiper arms, motors and blades.  The Translator vehicles were quite well filled!

 

I spent a week in Vienna Arsenal with them which was pretty epic, including walking past 18000 every day on my way to work!

Edited February 25 by Titan

[25kV]

1 hour ago, Titan said:

Now to the "Networkers" bit.  Rather than a single 4 car unit as it appears, they were in fact two halves, one GEC/Alstholm the other BREL/ABB.  This was because only two cars would fit in the chamber at once, and we weren't going to drag 8 cars all the way to Vienna just so we could test 4 of them.  But things were not straightforward.  Although the two builds may have looked the same with a superficial glance, there was hardly a single thing that was the same on either of them.

Wow, yes, even just zooming in on some of the closer photos on the page linked above - different window hoppers, underframe layout, bogie-area clutter, probably doors too...   Don't you love a standardised fleet?   😉